Is it true that the Americans helped us (The British) out in the second world war?

Question

and what part did they play?

Answer 1

It's true the Americans helped themselves to our birds whilst we fought them on the beaches.

Answer 2

Ok, in an effort to salve consciences I'll be happy to say that the Americans came late to the party, but their contribution was quiet useful in the downfall of the enemy. We should never forget those who died in the conflict (Brit or Yank), but, the second world war was more than three generations ago.! The money the Americans subsequently loaned us (in bargain for trading rights, which led to their own golden era of the 1950s, 60s and early 70s) has finally been paid back, with interest. As much respect that I have for America, I tend to ignore the mewling catcalls from people who are less than 60, and therefore never had any part of this war. Analysis of the tactics in place by the Nazi war machine would show that Hitler's reich had failed as early as 1942. Without the Americans, the war would have taken a little longer, many more would have died, but ultimately, victory would have been in the hands of the larger European allies.

Answer 3

The US support and its involvement were a great contribution to the winning of the war. The US supplied weaponry and materials by the Lend-Lease Act even before in actually became unilaterally involved in Jan 1942. Without the US, the war would have most probably gone on for many years than it did. The shear industrial might and man power of the US therefore played a huge part in winning the war.
However, the main defining battles in the war were either fought partly with, or without the US involvement.
The Nazi German war machine failed to grip control of Russia and its huge oil and coal fields, partly through prolonged cold weather and the extra Siberian Troops moved in the help a besieged Stalingrad. Germans in the other and still contentious part of the world, The Middle East, failed to control this region and it resources because of failed tank battles between the German General Rommel and the British General Montgomery. Forgotten are the African, Indian, Burmese, Egyptian contributions in this, a battle of supply lines, the battle for North Africa.
The Germans were also prevented for completing their Hydrogen Bomb building, by the Norwegian Alpine corps blowing of the Vemork in 1943. This could be seen as the most defining and important action during the war, as the German ability to drop Atomic bombs first would have ensured allied loss. The scientists involved in this, and so the technology was later divided between US and Russian military both creating future Hiroshima and Nagasaki, then the Superpowers Space programs. Lastly, the German Navy failed to control the Air and Sea of the Atlantic. The US and British Navy were together massive in preventing this, but the Royal Air Force were the pioneers in securing allied superiority in the air. Without a secure resource line, that was broken by allied (that is US, British, Egyptian, Australian, New Zealand, African, Indian, French etc. and later Italian) the German war machine ran out of steam. I have simplified this somewhat. It is important to realise there were many failures during the war made by the allies, that also pushed it in favour of the Germans. Also, none of the battles mentioned here fall in any true lineage, so can not be placed in any true order of importance.
Therefore, for one country to claim total responsibility for the credit of winning the war is arrogant and very ignorant.

Answer 4

The United States did nelp the British in many ways prior to ntering the war in late 1941 through Leand-Lease allowing Americans to join the British and Canadian forces to fight and "selling war goods" to them and not to the Germans. The political climate in America after WW1 was an isolationalist climate after the failure of the Leagua of Nations which was primarily the fault of the British for not helping the Americans control the French revenge factor against the Germans. I would also pint out that Chamberlain's policy of appeasement and "peace at any price" also contributed heavily to World War Two. Roosevelt and much of the U.S. government knew war was both inevietable and necessary against Hitler but if they had moved and declared war they would have never gotten through Congress and been booted out of office the next election. The attack on Pearl Harbor gave the American people a reson to fight but they did not have one to fight the Germans and did not declare war on the germans. It was almost two weeks later when Hitler kept his treaty with the Japanese and declared war of the U.S. When that happend the U.S. made a decision to place its primary interest n the Europea front because Roosevelt understood the importance of defeating Hitler and that was a very risky decision because the majority of Americns saw the Japanese as the primary threat. This lead to the retaking of North Africa, Anzio landings and Normandy landings and the eventual defeat of the Germans. Was Germany already in a slide down hill-Yes but that had very little to do with the British. Britian did not have the manpower or materials to force a landing and invasion of Europe proper especially after the war in the Pacific started because of manpower requiements there. The British could defend but offensively they were not in a situation to do much in Europe. In the long run the Germans would have been defeated in Europe if America had not entered the war but it would have been because of the Russian land forces. If that had happend do you see the France, Belguim Denmark, Holland and other occupied countries being returned to the "proper leadership' or would they have gone the way of Poland and the eastern European countries? I think the U.S. assistance and later entry into the war sped up the defeat of Hitler and kept the entire continent from being Russian controlled. The war in the Pacific and defeat of Japan was primarily a U.S. show but the accomplishments of the British forces in India and te Australians and New Zealanders in the southern Pacific areas New Guiena and so forth should not be forgotten. In short if the Americans had not helped the British the Russians would have won World War Two and Britian would have been an isolated island staring at the Russians on the French coast at the end; would that have been that much better? Stalin and Hitler were peas in a pod when it came to conquest, militayr actions and treatment of people and both looked for domination.

Answer 5

This is one of those questions that makes me laugh. If the US hadn't helped out in WW2 this question would instead be asking why the US did not help out the Allies in WW2. Truth is Britain didn't win the war, the Soviet Union didn't win the war, the USA didn't win the war, it took ALL three to win the war.

Churchill desperately wanted the US to enter the war. It wouldn't surprise me to learn the British government knew about the attack on Pearl Harbor but said nothing about it (how's that for an ally).

Answer 6

Yes as Lady Bug says" why should we get involved if we don't have to?"
Dear lady every thinking American in Government new that if England fell in the summer of 1940,USA would have been the next target with secondary targets Egypt middle East;Naturally the British wouldn't surrender and the Germans wouldn't be stupid to attack colonies(India for example) and USA with full involvement in the Pacific later in 41 could ill efford a two front war...Germany could and did but you could't even have 1/3 of Germany's order of battle...
So you should have tried to prevent that happening by helping unconditionally,not take advantage of the British....
As for the British speaking German...only a naive person could ever say that;England didn't fall in 1940 and Germany lost its chance...it wouldn't have had another one again.

Answer 7

The United States aided UK before Pearl Harbor through the Lend Lease program, additionally, we helped the USSR through the same program and that helped the Soviets hang on and eventually they crippled the Nazi's. Also, in the European theater we provided tons or armor to Montgomeries forces that helped him stop Rommel short of pushing the British out of Egypt. During Operation Torch the U.S. took the lead, had they not the Vichy French may have attacked the British (which was a real concern for the Allies) as they landed (the French were still sore about the British destroying French warships in order to prevent them from being used by the Germans). The U.S. provided so much material and manpower to the U.K. that it is insulting to say they didn't help.

Additionally, the U.S. stopped the spread of the Japanese in the Pacific thus preventing the British from being forced out of that area.

After the war the Marshall plan helped rebuild Europe, had they not done so then the Soviet Union would have had free reign in Europe and the U.K. might have had a Soviet satellite staring at them from across the channel.

Other then that the U.S. didn't help the U.K. And besides, I thought that in 1938 Nelville Chamberlain said '"My good friends, for the second time in our history, a British Prime Minister has returned from Germany bringing peace with honour. I believe it is peace for our time." Looks to me you thought you had Hitler under control.

Answer 8

The Americans certainly helped win the Second World War. It might have been over quicker but the bugle was blown in 1939 and they didn't hear it until 1941 !

Answer 9

Wow, what a variety of answers and from here to Mars and back in validity.

All I know is my grandfather, who at the time was a 34-year-old husband and father of 3 little kids got drafted by President Roosevelt into the army and wound up in Belgium in the fall of 1944. Most of the guys in his company didn't live past Christmas that year. He came home unable to walk through a metal detector without setting it off and with one less eye. That's not counting the months of nightmares, the years of separation from his family and the hardships they went through on reduced means.

My daddy sang on the radio in Pennsylvania as a child to sell war bonds and both my parents and their siblings, aunts and uncles endured rationing of almost everything to further the war effort.

Did that help you all in the United Kingdom? How "selfish" was that? Maybe you should be asking the old-timers in Britain how they felt about the Americans entering WWII.

Answer 10

Yes it is true. If the Japanese hadn't bombed Pearl Harbour, it's likely Hitler would have won. They came in towards the end and helped with resources ie money and machinery and manpower. Also, Eisenhower was a great military leader.

The British held off the Nazis in 1940 with the Battle of Britain, but the only reason they weren't able to invade was because the Hitler chose to attack Russia instead which was a big mistake.

Answer 11

Yes they came in in the War's dying years. The main reason they were involved came about because of the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbour. Prior to that they were happy to see millions die fighting the Axis of Evil.

Now they like to think that they were the heroes and that they "saved yur asses", when in reality it was financial reasons only why they stepped in. They watched their natural Allies take a hammering while they stood back and watched. But am I glad they helped, yes, just as I am glad we had many Allies during that awful time.

Don't forget there was just more than the British and the US on the Allies side, many other countries' valiant actions and roles during WW2 seem to be swept under the carpet and forgotten about.