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

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?

Son of Ishtar

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!

Brittany

And I suppose you believe your country did all of the work and won the wars?

Every country did their part...if you didn't want the help you should have been strong enough to fight for yourselves.

I appreciate the history lesson....but I already knew this. Thanks though.

gaz

Sorry mate, a bit one sided. Yes, we could have done with their help a bit sooner, but without the Americans we'd have been up **** creek. Most of the rest of Europe had already packed in...and don't even get me started on the French.

Long live USA. They are one of the goodies.

richp

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.

5th Earl of Daveshire

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.

Mel

Great! Whatever. I don't ever remember taking full credit for any war, but if you say so. I mean really we don't get to a war that has little to do with us, we are bad, we go to a war, we are bad, we start a war, we are bad, we don't start a war, we are bad. I get it! No matter what we do, the rest of the world will see it as wrong.

The US went to great efforts to send people across a big ocean many of years ago to die, so other would be saved. Should we have ignored the whole thing!

Gotta have more explosions!

Evidently they don't realise that, believe it not to be the case.

America was pretty much the big hammer that rode in and made winning the war a whole lot easier for the traditional good guys.

Suppose the US never joined in during the second world war. Would Britain have then gone on to invade all of Western and Central Europe by itself, against numerically and technologically superior German forces? Rubbish, they would have just held out until the Soviet Union eventually overcame them. Don't delude yourself into thinking Britain was the second-largest contributor of the allied forces. In terms of casualties taken and inflicted on the enemy, the Soviet Union and United States are on top. North Africa? They didn't go there without the Americans. Battle of Britain? Please, you lost the Battle of France, the fate of the war wasn't dependent on either.

If Britain wasn't separated from the rest of Europe by the English Channel, they would have been blitzed.

To be fair, it took the US quite a while to get a move on... defeats at the Kasserine Pass, Pearl Harbor, Philippines, Wake Island... and people still have the nerve to poke fun of France for surrendering? Ha! Justify surrendering the Philippines first.

It seems to me that you posted here, anticipating someone who shares the same beliefs as you to post so you can award the best answer. Do you want a question answered or not?

rogerglyn

John Wayne won the two wars.

john_galt0

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.

russkimuzhik

The commoners think the winner is who announced in the media, not who did the job.
If CNN and Fox said so, the commoners will believe in "Mission Accomplished".

By the way, thanks for the Lend Lease supplies. They accounted for 6% of what USSR produced during the war. The Sherman tanks were awful, but Studebaker trucks were awesome.

theflatearth

If I was you, I'd go to the library(you know, the place where books are kept) and do a little reading...know what I mean?

Sweetpea

Let me give you another quick history lesson. America was supplying military equipment to GB on a regular basis. We had supply ships crossing the Atlantic since the beginning of the war (1939). We were also supporting Russia in this regard too. So I think you need to eh....reassess your arrogance in this regard.

Brian I

Did we lose one American's soldier's life? Then we did more than we should have. That was Europe's war. But did we come in and lose millions of lives? You betcha. It's also funny how the European pushback to the east just happened to be greased with the blood of Americans. Yes, the British did a kick butt job. Yes, the Russians showed what they were made of. But until we got in, it wasn't looking so good.

mike b

we did our part

JakeS

Write all this down. Take the pages and stuff them because that's where Revisionist History belongs.

Angela C

Does it matter? We all benefited from the wars ending right?

mowhokman

to all the Americans: every bit of equipment you gave us was paid for by every UK citizen from the end of ww2 up till 2005 i believe. 60 years plus of payments; also before ww2 the British pound was the dominant world currency and due to your loan arrangements we had to open up our empire to American trade; this was America STEALING the no1 spot from the UK. so much for special friends. ALSO America crewed the UK and our ally Poland by allowing Russia to take most of eastern Europe(this is fact and if you bother you can look it up). America only help when it sees a quick profit and then screws it's allies. As for the UK being as 1 daft yank in here put is technologically inferior. Who invented the radar. who gave America and Russia jet engine technology that was far superior than there own. who introduced tanks in to warfare?? i will tell you it was the UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN.

Wounded Duck

And Russia and Britain fought with equipment and food supplies from America until they could amass enough US troops to finally invade the continent. Oh, and thanks to the Russians for all their assistance in the Pacific Theater!

guns155mm

That is just how American history is taught to us. Anyone that knows history knows that we jumped in to help out England and France. It was a combined effort in Europe. As for the Pacific, It was mainly an American push. Yes the English did help as did the Australians "for give me if I miss a country" but is was mainly Americans.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: