Why doesn't the Soviet Union get more credit for defeating Nazi Gemany?

Question

Throughout school (in California), I was taught that American and British forces did most of the work in defeating the Germans in World War II (D-Day, etc.), but in fact the bulk of the German army was engaged on the eastern front with the Soviets. Why don't the Soviets get credit for defeating most of the German army?

Answer 1

They do from most serious historians. Most people are rather ignorant on the history of the war to give them credit. It should however, also be remembered that the USSR received massive amounts of small arms, tanks, planes, food stuffs and raw materials from THE UNITED STATES, and it should also be stated that this had MUCH to do with feeding and equipping their armed forces. Many a Soviet soldier remembers chowing down on American Spam. Nikita Krushchev himself credited American shipments of food from keeping the Soviet Military from starving.

Answer 2

You got the standard school history, and it's both strongly oriented to the general American point of view and mighty boring. On the other hand, when you try to correct that with your WW II example, you get the impression that the Soviets ran through eastern Europe on T34 tanks, when they actually had a lot of trains running on tracks supplied by US steel companies, and there were even some American M4 Shermans in the Red Army. Even among military historians, its unusual to find one who appreciates the intelligent way in which the Red Army used its horse cavalry. The more you dig, the more interesting history gets.

Answer 3

This is because you are learning about it in the USA, so naturally you are learning a pro American bias. This is nothing new really. Imagine learning about the American Revolution in Great Britain, where is was called the War for America. You can imagine how they have a pro British bias. Try learning about the Mexican-American War in a school in Mexico. They teach that the land they lost in the war, the Mexican Cession, is still considered their ancestral land, which is the reason they feel they have the right (yes, the right) to cross the border at will. History is a strange thing. Try learning the Civil War in Georgia, for example. It is different than learning it in Massachusetts, that is for sure. So the USSR, which kept Germany busy while the USA and Britain prepared for D-Day, doesn't get much credit in the west. This is partly also the result of the Cold War and anti communist attitudes for decades here.

Answer 4

because they didn't ...

if not for the help they received from america they would not have been able to stop the nazi war machine and they would be speaking german now (and possibly better off for it...lol).

The bulk of the german army was fighting to stop the nazi's only because they were supplied equipment and technology by the west (or the americans...), else they wouldn't have stood a chance.

I am in Australia and I was taught that all three (american, british and russians... - it wasn't the soviet union then - it was after the war as they grabbed as much as they could before the germans surrendered...).

and if you remember the ussr had some pretty nasty plans for the west but we were lucky that they were pretty lame (as a country...) and the americans were there to stop them.... this is of course after ww2 and the cold war...

Answer 5

Anyone who has ever done more study of the subject than what is written in their high school texts knows that the Soviets were the dominant factor in Europe. The whole idea of the "second front" in France was to make it even easier for both fronts to succeed. Even Hitler knew he couldn't win a two-front war.

But you have to understand that the folks who write the history books you're using have agendas and editors to satisfy, and they have to simplify American history for the unwashed masses of kids who really could not care less, and only take the classes because they're required for graduation.

Answer 6

From a strict militia point of view - no. even regardless of the undeniable fact that - there is concept (it extremely is not any greater desirable than that) that they could have performed the political pastime greater efficient. while the panzers rolled in the time of the Ukraine in 1941 the Germans have been initially welcomed as liberators. of direction, as quickly as the Germans revealed their actual colorations.... Had the Germans began, in the early days of Barbarossa, the Germans had introduced their popularity of the independance of the Baltic States (and meant it), and observed healthful with the Ukraine - then there is a minimum of a trustworthy danger that the U.S. might have confronted political upheaval in the Caucasus and effective Asia, maximum suitable to the political crumple of the entire shooting experience. of direction, the Nazi regime grew to become into precisely the type of regime hat could no longer probably have performed that.

Answer 7

Because the war was going very very bad until the United States joined the fight. Almost every historian agrees that Germany would have won had the US waited even 6 months longer. Sitting back & doing nothing can get a lot of people killed. The Soviet armies were great allies but they were not winning without the US. I think that is why the US & Britian get most of the credit.

Answer 8

No country single handily defeated the Nazi's ! The three major players were Great Britain, the US and the Russians.

They all played a major role in taking down Hitler, and it's doubtful that one country could have done it, alone!

Answer 9

they do get credit if you know your WWII history. why would schools here down play America over the soviet union? in Russia the texts books probably give them a big role and us a small one. i would be willing to bet there is very little mention of the convoys to Russia full of lend lease equipment from the USA , and Great Britain. want to bet that in the UK there texts books show them in a more prominent role than the others who fought?

Answer 10

If you read history books you will find that they get plenty of credit for the defeat.

The political reasons behind why schools in the US give more credit to the US and British forces is pretty obvious when you think about it. I would assume it is just the opposite in schools in Russia.