If anything, Hitler defeated himself vis a vis 'operation barbarosa'..if any country can take credit for defeating Hitler, it was Stalin and the Soviet Union. They were there hundreds of miles ahead, and made infinite more sacrfices than the USA (which joined, only after Churchill pleaded him, and not until Japan attacked the USA, while FDR had prior knowledge of the attack})...
if ONE nation defeated HItler, it was the Soviet Union! Hitler killed himself with Eva, et all in his bunker because he knew he couldn't nnegotiate with the Russians..while many Americans had prior to 11939, and even during the war itself, supported the Nazi war machine. I'm not going to even get in with another fatuous and fradulent argument that Reagan somehow was responsible for the fall of the Soviet Union, just because said dialogue is the most important historical query at hand re: Americans and their ignorance when it comes to its own history.
2007-01-28
02:23:25
·
21 answers
·
asked by
Happier in China
2
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
Note to you:
I have an M.A in Asian Studies from UBC, and a Phd in Chinese history from Bejing Univeristy (thesis written in Chinese - I am 28)
I also did my undergrad at Leeds Uni in England.
While I must admit that if the US hadn't gotten involved in '41, Hitler's demise would have taken much longer. One of the biggest historical malpractices among both society at large and some experts is that if the US did not enter the War, all of Europe and possibly N.A would have become part of N.Germany. Mussolini was already dead in the water in Ethiopia, and N.Africa was a breeze for Patton. The one things Americans can credit themselves with is saving England's ***, and helping liberate France (albeit DeGaulle and the French resistance was inexorable). And, yes, Hitler did weaken his resources by taking on war on both the Eastern and Western Fronts. (and having to seek resources in the Norway, etc). However, the Russian advance was far more quicker and to Berlin before.
2007-01-28
02:43:18 ·
update #1
If Americans don't understand this integral part of your history, how can you speak of Vietnam, or Iraq, or how China will surpass you in 20-30 years?
2007-01-28
02:48:17 ·
update #2
gandamack1,
very amusing. i assume you're not bi or trilingual or even cultural by the hair on the crack of your ***. study syntax, punctuation and grammar.
2007-01-28
02:54:41 ·
update #3
All_Dawgs,
Yo dawg, you so smart, you tell it like it is bro...
Go back to school...I thought the black minority, of all minorities in the USA would finally have learned some understanding and empathy by now.
You go bra'
"Get rich or die tryin'"
P.S. I'm dead serious. The Chinese word for, "Umm"...is, "*****, or Na ga"
2007-01-28
03:13:56 ·
update #4
Correct.Barbarrosa was Hitler's Waterloo
Even more amazing was the Ignorant american claim that they won the cold war.
The Russians were the first to come to their senses and end the arms race and animosity. The victory was actually theirs....the USA is still the same old INSANE Bombers they always were.
Americans are more interested in entertaining themselves than anything else....that is why they are generally ignorant. They are easily manipulated in to wars as George W Bush proved.
Now americans are suffering in IRAQ as they should
2007-01-28 02:42:11
·
answer #1
·
answered by T - blaster 1
·
3⤊
3⤋
No mate, the US saved our a*sses, just admit it. If we had been invaded we wouldn't have stood a chance, all that 'home front' rubbish. Sure the nazi war machine ran off american fuel, sure they hated the communists and stung them before being stung back, yes the Russain army was huuuuuge, and the RAF stopped the Hun from ever reaching the shoers. But Europe was full of fascists, 'vichy france', what a group of traitors, plus there were nazi supporters in Britain trying to tear the place down, they were so close.
Just because you don't like them doesn't mean to say you can distort things, most of the BS you'll see in these answers is just more ignorant rubbish, the point is that Britain and America fought side by side against fascism. Yes Nazism would have imploded in Germany but it could have hung on in the rest of Europe for years, look at all the skinhead groups. And what about the V weapons, we could have surrendered to Germany by 1945. As far as ignorance and Americans go though I'm right behind you
2007-01-28 02:47:48
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Egos are the hardest thing to break the USA was so Inept in WW2 in europe after Hitler invaded the USSR they could have stayed Home Hitler was Going to Lose WW2
no matter How Much help he got from the USA
example Standard Oil Tankers were Refueling U boats in the Atlantic in august 1943 Caught By the US coast Guard
if the USA like SKF of Philadelphia had Not sold 63 % of its Ball bearings to the Nazis WW2 would have ended in 1943
2016-05-08 22:17:56
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Europe is a Continent and would probably look about the same today even if the 3rd. Reich had won. You know, fjords in Norway, France would still be shaped like a hexagon, beaches around Spain, Greece, Italy and Portugal, mountains between the north and the south and fish and rain around the UK. By the way! Thanks for giving the UK a mention. We, France, Poland, Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union did contribute a bit to the defeat.
2016-03-29 06:18:02
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
i can assure you, the war would be a good 3 years longer if it wasn't for America. the US provided so many supplies that were integral for the Soviets and British. Yes, most of the price was paid by the Soviets, but the US does deserve credit for beating the Germans, they were the main presence on the western front. Russians were the only presence on the eastern front.
2007-01-28 02:39:07
·
answer #5
·
answered by !{¤©¤}! 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
It was FDR's decicion to unfreeze Russian assets instead of German assets in this country and provide supplies to the Russian Army that allowed the Russians to stave off defeat. General Patton would have beaten the Russians to Berlin if Politicians hadn't stopped him. Hitlers gravest Military mistake was attacking Russia while England still fought. Had he been patient and defeated England first his scientist eventually would have handed him the atomic Bomb andhe would have defeated Russia. If One Nation defeated Hitler it was the Japanese who brought the US into the war.
2007-01-28 02:38:36
·
answer #6
·
answered by pretender59321 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
Many countries defeated Hitler. No one said that the USA did it alone. The fact is that the world probably couldn't have done it without us either.
Chinese people will surpass the US but they will also eventually fail as well. Citizens of China will not stand for governmental oppression forever no matter how many people the Party kills or harvests for organs.
2007-01-28 03:08:20
·
answer #7
·
answered by All_Dawgs_Go_To_Heaven 3
·
2⤊
1⤋
Hitler may have defeated himself by fighting a war on three fronts but had the USA not joined the war it would have been a war on one front, the Wetern front, and Germany was more than able to hold off the Russians.
But by dividing the German troops into three Germany was doomed. Had Germany not attacked Russia until he secured all other fronts he would have been able to secure all of Europe and Russia without a problem.
His downfall was his hubris, the Russians played a small, but vital, part in it.
2007-01-28 02:34:48
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
As one who takes his historical events seriously, I am often bemused at the claim of 'America won WWII'. Whilst no one can under-estimate the impact of the USA's intervention to claim that the war was solely won by us is a mythical claim to say the least.
The BRITS, many African soldiers, The Poles and I daresay the Russians will look at this claim with incredulity and it only confirms the view that arrogance has blinded the US historians and therefore the sheep that follow blindly.
2007-01-28 02:34:14
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
1st...you quoting all those learned degrees of higher education shows how useless higher ed can really be....Russia fought because we gave them the stuff to do it with...My dad made the Murmansk run three times with the Merchant Marines...they had the folks but nothing to fight with.....you give Stalin credit for anything?....good lord......Regan beat the USSR because they couldnt afford to keep spending 10% of their GNP to try and match his military buildup.....now,lets see...oh yeah...whats your problem?..you hate Americans,just out with it...dont beat around the bush...just say it....but its ok...we know you do.....you can be a emmiter of wind from a monkeys backside...we dont mind....syntax?...whuts that little feller?...assume makes an a** out of you and me
2007-01-28 02:51:51
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋