Why are Americans the ONLY people in the world who actually believe THEY won both Wars?

Question

They seem so ignorant and actually believe they single handedly won WW1 & WW2. When in actuality they came in very, very late, after massive casualties on all sides. They always seem to belittle the contribution of others or the fact they arrived so late. They often forget the Allies, imparticular Australia and New Zealand pushing back Rommel in Northern Africa and holding out massively out manned in Tobrook. Also the old chestnut that we would all be speaking German/Japanese if they didn't come to our rescue really doesn't hold water when you realise both enemies were being pushed back, particularly the Japanese on the Kokoda trail. The japs invented a new phrase for retreat, which was "advance to the rear", because they had no similar word for retreat. In so many cases its well documented Americans were falling behind in the jungles and at the beach head compared to the Australians, and that was even before the arrival from Egypt of the Australian Imperial Force.

Answer 1

as an american history buff, i can honestly say that we, the americans, could NOT have won either ww1 or ww2 without the help of the allies. and vice versa. the allies wouldn't have won without us as well. and your statements that the americans came in "late" in ww2 is erroneous. and yes you are correct in stating that the aussies and new zealanders performed brilliantly in the north africa campaign. without them the vaunted british eighth army would not have accomplished what it did. i agree with you there. and likewise in the pacific as well. the anzac troops that fought with macarthur in new guinea, borneo, and the philippines also performed brilliantly. but what you fail to mention is that is was the americans that stopped the japanese at the battle of the coral sea. the japs were on their way to port moresby and then onto australia if they hadn't been stopped. also don't forget it was the americans that defeated the unsinkable japanese navy at midway, turning the tide in the pacific. it was also the americans who took the solomons, the gilberts and the marianas, iwo and okinawa.
you see it was a global effort that won both wars. in ww1 the british and the french were locked in stalemate trench warfare with ungodly casualities. hundreds of thousands were lost in the trenches at the somme, verdun, ypres. the germans were bleeding the allies dry. eventually the germans would've broken through without the help of the americans and the fresh troops it supplied.
in ww2, if hitler had listened to his generals instead of his ego, the war might have come out differently. in the words of franklin delano roosevelt, "america must become the arsenal of democracy". without the strength of american industry, the british wouldn't have survived even with the anzacs help. and i have yet to read any accounts of americans retreating from the beachheads anywhere. the only time it came close was at tarawa. but we took that little island in 4 days. thank god for the marines.
and yes you are correct that the americans didn't fare very well in the jungles of burma and french indochina. that was because we weren't trained for that kind of warfare. but that changed with a new general and the training that we got from the british in india. so you see it just wasn't the u.s. it was everybody

Answer 2

Right so it was not americans that landed on D-Day? That was pretty much the begining of the end. O also i am guessing that someone else dropped the A-bomb 2x. Nothing short of massive destruction was going to get them to surrender and lets face it they had us especially in numbers we needed the bomb back then without it we might still be fighting to this day! yes the allies were doing there very best but really now be honest without american supply lines and mass production and mechanization do you really think that thw war would have been won by the allies? Liberty ships were one of the biggest contributions to the war effort we litterally were building ships faster then they could be sunk (altho some of them would sink on there own.....) Without america's involvement things would have gone much differently that is why we became involved back then we were a nation of isolationism not getting involved untill we realized just what the outcome might be. If i remember correctly also it was an american general in both cases that accepted the surrender of the enemy.
But i am an american so i guess my view on history might be a bit tainted. I have no idea what they teach in other countrys. After all history is written by the victors.

Answer 3

If it weren't for the United States; Australia would've suffered the fate of people in places like Nangkin, The Phillipines, Hong Kong, Manchuria, French Indochina, Dutch West Indies and many more.

The AUssies and the Anzac troops did a wonderful jo,b but it was the US< with its massive industrial might that did most of the heavy lifting, including supplying our allies with the weapons, ammo and supplies to keep the fight going.

To think that our role was minor is to negate the reality that if we hadn't stepped in, Australia would've been a Japanese colony by the time we got there.

Answer 4

From the looks of it, it appears that you are the one that is "soi ignorant". You, and your few supporters on this thread have had their arses handed to them.

Next time you want to make a gross generalization about Americans, like the one you've done in this thread, remember to bring your game.

Almost all Americans I know understand that WWI and WWII were a combined effort. Your and a few of your supporters' ramblings about ignorant Americans and their belittlings is nothing more than unsubstantiated garbage, with nothing to back it up. I sincerely hope that you're not an accurante representation of the Australian people as a whole, or God help them.

Answer 5

I know that the people who know their history or were in the military then do not hold such an opinion;if masses tend to exaggerate their national importance...well it is understandable(none can defeat ignorance).
The war was lost for Germany as far back as 1940(out of bad planning and gross miscalculations...the rest was a matter of time...In 1944 when the Americans along with their allies landed in France,the war had been already decided in the East and the Russians entered Hitler's Europe before anyone else...Yes the USA gave mountains of supllies to combatants to ease out the burden of russian production so it could increase the numbers of guns and tanks of superior
fighting quality than the American ones.But the bodies killed were Russians and English,Australians free French,Greeks New zelanders and they fought the decisive battles of the war
and the victories are theirs in all important fighting fronts,East
Europe 80% and Africa,Northern Europe,The Mediterranean
etc... The failure of the German attack on Soviet Union due to the Balcan diversion in terms of time and the battles ofStalingrand and El-Alamein later had decided WWII.
WWI had alredy been decided and the Americans entered against worn out Germans as in Normandie in 1944...

Answer 6

I think a lot of what Americans believe about the past comes from film. Almost every war movie made in America for Americans focuses mostly on their contributions. Why? Because that's who they want to see. I'm sure it works the same way in other nations, as well. Most Americans would probably choose to watch "Saving Private Ryan" over "Gallipoli", because one is all about Americans and the other deals with a battle fought before the US entered the Great War.

It's not always fair, but that's the way it is.

Answer 7

I don't know where you learnt your history Wayne but if the US hadn't entered the war when they did, Australia would have fallen easily to the Japanese.
Even with American involvement it was a pretty close call (Coral Sea Battle).
Before the US entered WW2, the Japanese were planning to invade and subdue Australia with 3 Divisions (Hitler invaded France with 50 Divisions). The Australian Government at the time was prepared to give up half the country without a fight and placed the first line of defence below Brisbane. After the US entered the war, Macarthur was placed in charge of Australia military forces and proclaimed that he would defend the whole country.
I for one are quite happy for the those in the US to believe "They won both wars".
We should be paying respect to those Americans that gave their lives in the defence of our country and not denigrating their involvement.

Answer 8

When Americana's say "we" won WWI and WWII, we are using the world in a universal sense as in "we all or the good guys". But generally Americans don't like war never have and perhaps never will the only time we tend to intervene if it have to do with National Security related. And to be truthful in WWI and WWII the Axis Powers were kicking butt right and left especially in WWII if it weren't for the "SUPPORT" of the American Allies Hitler would have ruled the world. And if your weren't a member of the Aryan race you had an birth rite death sentence. So be thankfully that things happen the way it did because if American had went in first The Axis Powers would have would its all about strategy never send in all your troops.

Answer 9

I have always touted Britain's, Canada's, and Austrailia's participation in the wars! Just that in both cases, things looked bleak for the allies UNTIL the US got involved. Then it was pretty much a case of the Germany(and it's allies) getting thier a**ses handed to them!
We didn't win the war on our own, but we sure stepped in and whooped major behind while the rest of the allies were getting butt kicked!

Answer 10

I'm an Australian too and while the allies did contribute, the simple fact is that Americans believe they won the wars because....they did.

Holding Tobruk is an act of heroism on the part of the AIF, yes. Did it win the war, no.

American Nuclear weapons are what won the war, it's that simple.