Why did America cowardly avoid WW1 & WW2 untill they were half over ?

Question

Just wondering because we hear so much crap from Americans that "they" won WW1 & WW2, BUT the reality was that they did all they could to avoid being involved, cowardly not commiting to the Allied effort and come in ONLY when directly attacked at Pearl Harbour, when other countries had already been committed and fighting abroad for 3-4 years.

Answer 1

cowardly? I don't think that was the reason and besides the second world war rested on the outcome of Operation Barbarossa.

Answer 2

America didn't really exist as it does today in WW1. and wasn't involved. in WW2 it tried to stay out of things, joining only after pearl harbor. America took charge on several fronts,(mostly ones the would-be allies were loosing on, or had lost interest in) notably the African front(commanded by the soon to be president Eisenhower) the pacific island/japan front, and were very active on the southern end of the western front. America also made their presence felt in the Mediterranean in places like Sicily and Corsica. many people see the Americans joining the war as a huge turning point in the war, D-Day was largely their doing.( IE putting the allies on the offensive) I personally think the whole war could have been avoided had Americans been more competent. the appeasement( allowing Hitler's regime to go on as it did to appease him) only happened because the west European powers were still weakened. had America flexed it's military muscle(they weren't the power they are now during this era, but at that point they were the only country with a full, not depleted army after ww1) at some point before the invasion of Czechoslovakia. there wouldn't have been a war. but they did nothing. it's all a matter of perspective really.

Answer 3

America is not in Europe and they were practicing a term called isolationism. They were avoiding military conflicts that did not directly involve them. First, in WWI the United States was not really a world power yet. Many of the roles we take on today are the result of the power we gained from being on the winning teams during WWI & WWII. The leaders of the country were trying to avoid spending resources on things that did not concern our own personal national security. Wars often bring hardship and the people of the United States did not want to indure these hardships when they saw no threat to their personal well being.

In WWII, the United States was trying to be friendly with all nations at first. We were still trading with both Japan and Germany until the two started sinking our merchant ships. We placed economic sanctions on the country of Japan and that is what motivated them to attack the US and bring us into WWII.

Also, the citizens of the Uited States did not support entering either of the wars at first. It would have been political suicide for any President who tried to enter either of these wars before they could gain public support. Also, back then, Congressional approval was required before any President could take military action. This has changed in the last 40 years. Both Wilson and Roosevelt wished to enter into the war to support our historic allies - England and France, but couldn't do so without public support. Both allowed that balls to fall into place - mainly the Zimmerman tellegram and the attack of Pearl Harbor - that set the wheels of American anger into motion. The Zimmerman tellegram could have been kept top secret if Wilson had wanted to stay out of WWI - instead he used it as the battle cry that lead the Americans into the war. And Roosevelt knew that an attack from the Japanese was imminent after he placed economic sanctions on Japan during WWII. He know that an attack would garner support for American involvement in WWII.

When the US says that they won WWI& WWII, they did. They were on the team of countries that ended up being the winners. I don't think anyone would claim that the United States alone won either or these wars. Often the United States is sited for having won WWII because they came into the war after France had fallen. Great Britian was still fighting, but had been fighting alone for a great deal of the war. They were badly in need of help. I don't think anyone however, would say that the British did not play a huge role in the victory of WWII. The United States, however, was the only winning country that had not had entire cities destroyed by the war. The United States exited the war a World Power becasue they did not face the rebuilding that Britian did. And becasue the US has not tied up defending their homeland, they were able to develop the Atomic bomb - something the British probably would have done had they not been bombed to oblivian. Location is the only reason that the United States fared better than the other Allies after WWI & WWII. And becasue the United States faired better and gained more power from WWI & WWII they are often considered the major winner.

Answer 4

I ONLY get peeved at SOME americans who come out with the crap of WE SAVED YOUR SORRY AR$ES, IF NOT FOR US YOU'D BE SPEAKING GERMAN/JAPANESE ....


the americans who say such crap are morons .. BUT I DO have to defend MANY americans who KNOW that BOTH of those wars were won after the efforts of ALL Allies .....

I think .. that as a result of their late entry into those wars .. and the criticism that they have copped for the late entry IS ONE OF THE REASONS why ... The USA *seems* to rush in to so many conflicts WITHOUT much consideration of WHAT may happen or the consequences now ....

They were a PART of the final out come in both WW1 and WW2 ....BUT there are many that REALLY need to learn the sacrifices the rest of us had made prior to their entry .. and stop with the John Wayne Bullshyte ... BUT we can't and shouldn't attack ALL americans for the ignorance of those that have no idea.

Answer 5

You need to make up your bloody mind Wayne. In one of your questions, you stated that we start wars and then need the English and Australians to bail us out, and criticize our military for being somewhere they don't belong, but then you ask why we waited to get involved in another war until we were attacked. Do you want America to be the protector of a free world and get involved anywhere there is injustice, or do you want us to sit back and allow govenments such as the one in Iraq to exist? I'm sorry, but you can not expect anyone to take your opinions seriously if you are going to contradict yourself. You also have asked if the Americans should give an aircraft carrier to the Aussies to patrol the south Pacific. Being that you, as an Aussie, seem to despise my country when we do attempt to protect peoples rights, why should I care about the safety of your country?
I'll be honest with you - I despise the fact that American soldiers are dying every day in what I feel is an incredibly useless and unwinnable war. I personaaly wish that our government would simply solve the problems we have here within our own borders. And if that means that one of our "friends" ,including Great Britain or Australia, has to protect their own damn selves for a while, so be it.
So make up your mind - should we protect the rest of the world? Should we simply stay out of anything that doesn't directly affect us? Or should we help only certain "types" of people, such as you?

Answer 6

It was a political decision, your analysis that the Americans were cowardly is way off base and flawed. It also shows you have very little understanding of the politics of those times.

There was no agreement that America would come running to help Europe in time of war, in fact America had no obligation to any of the countries in Europe pre-WW1 they were a newly founded country, with many people of the common belief by many new immigrants and old colonial families that they owed the countries of their origin no allegiance.

No country wants to go rushing blindly into war and in WW1 the American Military Forces were not the great modern army that you see today, military equipment was in very short supply and the military stretched throughout the country. It was involved in campaigns along the Mexican border and recently had been involved in the Spanish American war, which despite the Spanish connection was mainly fought around Cuba and other areas in the vicinity.

The Americans went into WW1 as a result of German attacks on unarmed passenger liners such as the Lusitania, and the Maximilian / Zimmerman Telegraph that indicated Kaiser Wilhelm II was advocating to help arm and equip the Mexican Army for a campaign against the USA. Once they joined and arranged their transportation to Europe the Americans were committed to adding 350,000 troops per month to aid the Allies in France, there was no way for the Prussians and Associated German States to match this flood of fresh, eager manpower into the war, also the Naval Blockade was having serious consequences with regards food and raw materials into Germany.

In WW2 the hesitation was again from US politicians who felt they owed no obligation to Britain and her Allies, that they had already bailed Europe out once before at great cost to the USA in men and material, also after the great depression the country was not able to go on a war footing to produce the large amount of supplies to put military forces into both the Pacific and Europe, after the attack on Pearl Harbor, American Public opinion changed and when War was declared on Japan it was also declared on Japan's Ally Germany.

However once committed they gave heart and soul into the effort to defeat the Japanese and Germans.

Answer 7

We had an isolationist mentality back then; if it did not involve us, then we would not get involved in it.

Then the Germans sank the RMS Lusitania in 1915 in American waters, killing 128 Americans onboard, plus the sabotage of both Black Tom in Jersey City, NJ, and the Kingsland Explosion in what is now Lyndhurst, NJ by German saboteurs, forced us into WW1 in 1918.

As for WW2, we were attacked by the Japanese in 1941 and the Germans declared war on the United States shortly after that.

I dunno where you heard that the Americans single-handedly won WW1 and WW2; they didn't; they won as part of the Allies in WW1 and WW2. American pilots like Eddie Rickenbacker were serving in the Lafayette Escadrille in WW1 since 1916 and pilots of the Eagle Squadron with the RAF since 1940 in Britain and the American Volunteer Group, or "Flying Tigers" in China since 1941, helping the Chinese nationalists against Japan.

So seriously, your premises are flawed.

Answer 8

OK, WW1, we had no reason to take sides until the Germans started sinking our merchant ships and then the Lusitania in 1916. Then when American troops did enter, they accomplished more from May to November of 1918 than the other allies accomplished in over three years. The American troops won the war.
Same thing in 1939, why did the allies wait until Poland was invaded, why did they let Hitler attack Czechoslovakia? Had they gone to war then, Hitler wouldn't have had such a strong Military. Once again, the Europeans let things get out of hand and we had to come out of our peaceful isolation and bail them out. Besides, had we sent our forces to France in 1940, under British and French leadership, our troops would have been left on the beach at Dunkirk.

Well now we are out of our isolation, I hope everyone is happy, no one has a reason to complain.

Answer 9

'We didn't "cowardly" avoid anything. We weren't AT war. You think that we are obligated to be at war simply because Britain was at war? Did you see us get involved in the Falklands simply because Britain was going to war?

When we entered the war, we threw our resources into the war. But in fact, both times you mention we were lending Britain military support long before we went to war. I wonder what your enemies thought about us helping you when we weren't at war ourselves?

This insane idea that America should have been there and helping Britain out of their mess sooner than we did sounds to me like you are an inferior nation who needs help. Is that why you think we should have come to your aid sooner? If so, then we have the right to claim we won because you are saying you needed our help sooner or you couldn't win at all.

We came when we did. You fought. We fought. The world turned out better because of everyone's effort. It is now history. Get over it and quit your bellyaching.



g-day!

Answer 10

For the same reason America is presently giving in to North Korea's blackmail, and for the same reason it does not stand up to a bully like China and is deserting its allies Taiwan and Japan. Because it does not have the moral fortitude to stand up for the principles it pretends to espouse--democracy and freedom. It will start wars to bring "democracy" to places like Irag and Afghanistan. An impossible mission at that, as those countries have never had anything remotely resembling democracy and not only do the people there have no idea what democracy is, they probably do not even want it as it is completely incompatible with their religion of Islam. Yet America will not support a country that is democratic (Taiwan). It would rather sell out its priniciples to China. If anyone can ever make any sense out of American foreign policy please let me know. But I won't lose any sleep over it, because I know a reasonable explanation will never come.

Answer 11

ever hear of the lend-lease act. look it up. Mr Roosevelt was wanting to get involved because he hated seeing the allies being pounded. when pearl harbor was bombed, it gave Mr Roosevelt the chance to help the allies. our people wanted to stay isolationist until pearl harbor. hitler attacked in sept 1939. we were attacked dec 1941. we fought from dec 1941 until sept 1945. the war was not half over when america got involved. and yes america, along with her allies did kick butt i'm very proud to say. also proud of most of her allies too. as for vietnam, we weren't defeated, we were forced to withdraw because of war protesters. a war we could have and should have won. but were handicapped by politicians that were afraid of the less than brave war protesters.