Do Americans realise that they weren't responsible for winning either of the world wars?

Question

World War 1 - America turns up in relatively small numbers in 1917 and then claim to win the thing.
World War 2 - The Germans fail in their mission to invade Britain in the summer of 1940 largely due to the RAF and their relatively weak naval forces. The British defeat Germany in North Africa and deprive Hitler of vital oil supplies. Germany turns it's attention to Russian oil supplies and launches into a drive toward Moscow. The German army suffers massive losses and is forced back on this front also. Hitlers grand adventure starts failing fast. The Americans finally decide to join in much later and then claim credit for winning another war after most of the hard work is done by Russia and Britain. More people fought and died on the Eastern Front than in all other theatres of World War II combined.

Just a quick history lesson.

To mysterian - I wish you would stay at home, as do most the of the rest of the world.

I know the Americans supplied us with a lot of equipment and they made us pay every penny back for every bit of kit. Nice bit of business - very thoughtful.

Answer 1

No, I'm afraid that you have not paid back even a penny on a pound of the lend-lease materials for Neville Chamberlain's War.

When the U.S. entered WWII, G.B. was like a man treading water surrounded by sharks.

U.S.citizens were against the U.S. getting involved in yet another war stirred up by the European failure to live like civilized beings, so the lend-lease was started as a means of supplying food and munitions that our government was supposedly prohibited from giving you.

Oh well, you are entitled to your own bias, I doubt that you were there. Did you know that Churchill's mother was American? Or has that been removed from your history books too?

Answer 2

Oh for the love of God, not this crap again!

WWI. Americans entered the war in 1917, right before the war was over. At this time, both sides had large groups of soldiers who were about to defect because after 3 years of war, they saw no solution. I'm not saying that we won the war for you, but are you going to believe that the Allies in WWI weren't happy to see fresh troops on their sides take up positions against the Germans (hundreds of thousands of troops, to relieve other troops that had been fighting for years)? You guys kept it going, but I must say that we finished it off. Even the Germans knew it. Give credit where credit is due. It was a joint effort, and perhaps America didn't elongate the war during the middle years, but we certainly had something to do with the end of WWI. All in all, everyone took part in the win.

Okay. In WWII, in the European theatre, it was a joint effort. The main battle that turned the tide was Stalingrad. As for you Brits, Americans in the know have nothing but admiration for what you did during the Battle of Britain. Outnumbered, but still did what had to be done. Dunkirk was amazing in its own right. I'm not saying that America won WWII, but why during every single WWII discussion with the Europeans, do you forget about the Pacific? You Brits had troops there too. However you got into a little bit of trouble in Burma and the Phillipines, but that's besides the point.

There was Germany, and Japan. Who took care of Japan (all reports about how we were terrorists for dropping the bombs on them can go straight to their Anti-American History Class 101, and stay there). How about Australia, New Zealand, and other countries that risked their *** in the Pacific? I don't think that Iwo Jima, Saipan, or Midway was in Europe?

And remember, Japan had a pact with Germany (and Italy, until they changed sides).

America didn't win both wars for anyone. It was a joint effort from everyone. But it isn't all or nothing. America may not have been the deciding force, but a little recognition from the revisionist historians in Europe would be nice once in a while. I never read about the English or French alongside the Americans in the Pacific. I have read about the Aussies and Kiwis though. A little props to them would be in order as well.

Answer 3

Well, id say it was a collective effort.

However if you look at Hollywood, you'd be forgiven for believing the Americans won both wars! Look at the movie u571, where the Americans got hold of the enigma code, they hadnt even entered the war by then!

WW1, the americans had little impact militarily, it was more the economic and political support, which was very welcome, if late in arriving!

The americans were NOT a world military power during WW1, and their troops were very green and did not perform as well as the British, French, Germans, Turks or Austro-Hungarians.

During WW2, the americans had more of an impact. However they entered late yet again, and only after they were themselves attacked.

The americans performed poorly in North Africa, and had to be relieved by the British. And General Clark was a nightmare in Italy, costing thousands of lives by his tactics, he entered Rome, glory hunting, while the other allies were doing the fighting! By doing this he allowed the Germans to escape into the mountains, delaying victory and costing lives.

The americans played a major part in the Normandy landings, and the Pacific was really their war.They werent involved in South Asia, the Mid East or North Africa that much.

Also, the Americans foolishly trusted the Russians, and under American command, the allies pushed eastwards too slowly, allowing the Russians to occupy most of Eastern Europe, much to the frustration of Field Marshall Montgomery!

Answer 4

America never actually declared war on Germany. When Japan attacked Pearl Harbour late 1941, when it was the general consensus that Germany could not at least 'WIN THE WAR' . Germany declared war on America because they had a treaty with Japan. The American's helped speed up the inevitable but it has to be said got extremely wealthy on the backs of Europe.

Answer 5

World war 1-America turns up with thousands of troops when the British and French forces were near exhausted, then gives the German offensive a bloody nose. The arrival of these fresh allied forces is reckoned by many historians to have tipped the balance.
And your assessment of World War 2 takes some factual evidence but completely missed out large chunks which don't match your hypothesis.
I seem to recall the conflict ending (after America suffered massive casualties in the Pacific theatre) with the dropping of two Atomic bombs. And the British forces were in no condition to invade Europe alone in 1944.

And I'm English, by the way. But hey, I'm guessing you are gonna pick the answer that most matches your tedious Yank-bashing.

Just a quick history lesson.

Answer 6

I don't think we claimed to have won WW1. We entered it, and it was over quicker than if we hadn't. For us in the USA it was the first time we had ever fought in Europe.
WW2 is a different story.. The Germans fail in the mission to invade Britain because we were supplying the Brits with much needed food and arms to fight it off, ditto for the Russian front. Why was the invasion of Normandy given over to Eisenhower, an American general?? The Americans brought most of the guns and food to the fight, Russia was in tough shape and the Brits ability to produce was greatly hindered.

NOW, what about the Pacific theater, you forgot that........where were the Brits???? Where were the Russians, oh yeah, the Russians joined in 10 days before the end of WW2.

Check your history.

Answer 7

You need to spend more time with the books;
Marshall Foch gave credit to the Americans. The French, English, and Germans were bled white. The war would have ended with the Germans holding parts of France. You should listen to Foch.
England remained standing after the Battle of Britain because the US sent vital war materials and ships to the British. Without those materials Britain would have starved from submarine warfare.
The English won at El Alamein because of US supplies including 700 tanks made in the USA. Montgomery had Rommel outnumbered.
The US sent over 10,000 trucks and supplies to the Soviet Union. The Soviet stopped the Germans 30 miles outside Moscow and couldn't break the siege of Leningrad for almost three years. The US saved the USSR.
The US bought time for both the English and the Soviet Union and wore down the Germans until the US got into the war. Like today there are always politicians who can't recognize an enemy if that enemy blows up two of their buildings.
I would tell you but it would be more fun and educational for you to look up how much equipment that was produced by the US of A.

Don't say it... Finland is the only country to pay back the US after the wars. England, you're in arrears.

Answer 8

Yes, and if you had studied your history like you say you have you'd have also realized that in WWI the USA tipped the balance to the Allies. Russia surrendered to Germany and were moving troops to the Western Front against Britain and France. Britain and France didn't have any more troops to bear against Germany.

As for WW2, what did France do to help out in the Pacific, or Russia, or even to an extent Britain. Mostly it was the US Navy that stopped Japan (Coral Sea).

During War it takes a team effort, Britain didn't win the war on their own, neither did France, or Russia or the USA, but all of them working together to defeat Italy, Germany and Japan.

Answer 9

Americans were a bit late for the party but they were partly responsible for winning the war. This type of warfare tactics have been used by many generals in China and have proven to be successful every time. I must point out that you have contradicted yourself, joining the fight much later does not alter the fact that they were not responsible for winning the war however small the part was.

Answer 10

World War I - Americans educated in history realize that Americans had a very small part in fighting World War I. Actual fighting is not the whole battle, as I'm sure you are aware. America spent huge amounts of money on the Triple Entente, which eventually got itself in turmoil with Germany, which led to the Zimmerman note, which led to American involvement. The money and more importantly, supplies, America sent over were crucial. But still, a war cant be won with supplies. Another point in WWI is that especially in that war, with endless trenches and gas, etc, psychological warfare was immensely powerful. Many of the battles of attrition came down to how many each nation had behind its trenches. When America joined the war, being fought bravely by extremely war-fatigued Brits, etc, it was a huge blow to the Central Powers. The mere thought of potentially endless, eager troops was staggering. Especially once Russia pulled out of the mix, this was a deciding blow to ending conflict much earlier. So, America had a major part in WWI, and contributed significantly, but did very little useful fighting.

Therefore, any American who claims that America won WWI is misinformed. However, it's mere presence had a major role, and more importantly, it contributed immensely with money and supplies. There's a reason Europeon nations were in major debt to the US after the first World War.

WWII - America once again lends and gives heavily to Europeon countries, making a huge difference. As little as America likes to admit that it couldn't have won the Revolution without France's support (even though the French didn't actually fight until the very end), America surely could not have won on its own. By the same token, America's financial contribution, both from the government and from private investors through Wall Street, had an immense impact on the War. Of course the Germans failed to invade Britain because of the RAF (and perhaps more importantly, a fleet of brave merchant vessels that ferried over the cornered British army secretly from the north of france. The arrogance and even stupidity of that particular German general in that move was undoubtedly a factor). Americans helped in North Africa a fair bit once it arrived, too (think Patton vs Rommel, glorified (even if a bit too much) in the American mind). On the Eastern Europeon front, the Russians were invaluable in their sacrifice to stop Hitler (whi obviously didn't read Napoleonic history). The Russian cold and the Russian armies' scorched earth techniques perhaps did more than the Russian people, although the Russian people certainly did above and beyond their fair share, beyond any other nation in human sacrifice. To say, however, that America had no significant part in WWII's Europeon theater is to discredit Britain and Canada's role in Normandy as well. Both of the latter countries were major players in Normandy (the definitive turn-around in WWII, which undeniably was as important as the Eastern front, if not as important in Allied losses), but America contributed more supplies, people, money (and one Supreme Commander), than either. In the Pacific theater, no other nation came close to the role America played. Just because the Pacific front wasn't on Britain's doorstep doesn't mean it wouldn't have changed world history drastically. Just as Europe was a potential doorstep for Hitler's armies, so was the Pacific rim a doorstep for Japan. America, with a somewhat insigificant (in comparison, mind you), British and Australian contribution, plus at the end some diplomatic help from the Russians, along with a threat for Russian troops to enter against Japan, singlehandedly defeated Japan's armies in the Pacific and ended the horrific Japanese atrocities (primarily in Manchuria). The Europeon armies didn't have to deal with such godawful, horrendous tactics as the Japanese used.

So America most certainly won the Pacific theatre, helped out some in the North African theatre (certainly a minor theatre), and contributed significantly enough in the Europeon theatre to say that America, Britain, and Russia (alphabetical order, in case you want to read into that) won the Europeon theatre.

Answer 11

In the Great World War, the European allies were at their breaking point as far as available manpower. The war had been waging since 1914 and the allied practice of attacking directly into the face of machine fire had taken a horrible toll on the whole of the European manhood.

The American Infantry Divisions must have been needed in the summer of 1917 because the British and the French were constantly after General Pershing to deploy his units as rapidly as possible. Pershing had to delay this for two reasons, first he needed to build up a strong operational force so he could field an American Army instead of reenforcing the efforts of the British and the French, one should never reenforce failure. The second reason is the newly formed American Army needed to learn an entirely new concept of war, this would be the first time since the American Civil War that an American Army would fight on the divisional and corps level in combined arm (integration of artillery, air power, armor and infantry operations) operations.

When the American Army does go on the attack it pushes back the Germans from positions they have held for nearly three years. The stalemate in France is finally broken and the allies are able to manuver off of the killing fields that had bled them dry for years.

When the Western Task Force lands North Africa it provides the localized second front that permits the British to end their stalemate against the Afrika Korps. The American presence allows for successful landings in Silicy and later in Italy. Following D-Day there is one joint Army of British, Canadian and French Forces being flanked by three American Armies.
The brave British Bomber Command must not be dismissed its efforts in bombing Germany each night, but it is the U.S. 8th Air Force that goes out in daylight to bomb the Germans.

The British 8th Army held on in North Africa because of American made M3 'Honey' (Stuart) Light Tanks and M3 'Grant' (Lee) Medium Tanks. The British 'Firefly' was an American Sherman tank upgunned with a British 17 pound (77mm) gun. The Free French Forces operating in France after D-Day wore American made boots, socks, leggings, trousers, belt, underwear, field shirts, jackets, gloves, caps and helmets. American made weapons, bayonets, ammunitions and load bearing equipment to carry all of this gear. Back pack and sleeping rolls, mess tins and rations, the French Forces never would taken the field had they had not been equipped by the Americans.

Russia used American made P39 Air Cobra and P40 Tomahawk fighters, M3 Stuart tanks and M4 Sherman tanks. M28 series 2.5 ton trucks and jeeps which they qrickly copied into their own versions. C47 Transport planes and a whole slew of other stuff aided the Soviet Union in destroying the Germans in the East.

The British, Russians and French losses were great, no question about it. These people were on the cutting edge of these two wars, however you are completely wrong in your assumption that America didn't rescue transeurope. Without American assistence none of the victories you claim would have been possible.

Maybe you should remove your blinder before giving any future history lessons because you are clearly wrong in this one!!!