Why Do The Americans Think They Won WW2?

[Krieglord]

Alright so maybe they were the ones to drop the bombs on Japan but when it comes to Germany that was more or less Russia's achievement in the field with the Americans and commonwealth being a distraction more then anything.

Why do Amuricans think they won it all?

Is it just the medias fault

I have met Americans who if you talk to them about ww2 or even ww1 they act as if their president went over their first hand led the troops from the front and one handedly defeated Germany.

[Vanoi]

Americans did win WW2. So did the British, Russians, and all the other allied nations.

Maybe its because where I live, but i have never heard people claim that WW2 was solely won by America.

[Fight!]

Much of it is very much excessive patriotism, but I don't think it's fair to downplay the aid American forces did bring to the European theater. They were certainly of great aid, even if the most aid was in the way of supplies. I think taking either extreme (America as winning the war vs America as insignificant), generally indicates an excess of patriotism.

[Col. Tartleton]

I think nearly everyone is kidding if we infer it that way. Naturally we feel our industriousness and manpower allowed us to wage a two theater world war and that we were the biggest of the 3 allies in contribution (even though it was probably Russia). It's pretty common knowledge among literate Americans that Russia did most of the fighting and dying and Britain (and Canada) were fighting side by side with us.

In fairness a lot of people don't know who the vice president is.

[The Juggernaut]

I doubt that the Russians alone could have stood against Hitler, with the Soviets demanding the Western Allies open other fronts to distract Germany from the Eastern Front. American industrial capacity was essential in keeping the British in the war, and it was American troops that spearheaded much of the action in Italy and France; these additional actions led to the collapse of the Fascist government of Italy, and the movement of supplies and men to the West. That, coupled with Japanese conflict with the US that kept them out of war with the USSR until the later part of the war, means that the Western Allies in general, and the USA in particular, plays a rather large part in the defeat of the Axis powers.

I don't mean to discount the action of the Russians, not at all. But remember that the Russians also received vast amounts of aid from the US during the war, despite ideological conflict. I think that the Russian front is partially marginalized, at least among popular American culture, because of the Cold War. It would be rather hard to explain to schoolchildren how great the sacrifices of the Russian people were, and how heroic many of their soldiers were, and then reconcile that with the attitudes that prevailed.

Just some of my thoughts...

[Krieglord]

I wasnt downplaying their material aid but when it comes to actual warfare... the USSR did the grunt work

Could the Americans and British have stomached a battle for Berlin? I doubt it

[Vanoi]

Could the Americans and British have stomached a battle for Berlin? I doubt it

Considering the Americans stomached Okinawa and Iwo Jima, i think they could have stomached Berlin.

Not to mention many American soldiers were upset when they were told that they would not be entering Berlin.

[Savoyard]

I wasnt downplaying their material aid but when it comes to actual warfare... the USSR did the grunt work

Could the Americans and British have stomached a battle for Berlin? I doubt it

Considering Patton's idea of plowing through the Russians after the Fall, probably.

[The Juggernaut]

I doubt that an offensive led by America or the British would have resulted in the same casualties that the Russians incurred, simply because of their style of warfare. It's entirely feasible that Patton could have taken Berlin months before the Russians, but instead was told to turn south for political reasons.

Not that the US could have won the war by themselves, or without the Russians soaking up the Nazis on the Eastern front. I would argue that no one of the Allies could have stood alone against the Nazis.

[Imperial]

They didn't win?

Now that's the most crazy history revisionism I have ever witnessed on these boards.

[Wulfburk]

USSR did the fighting, and Britain holded the ground.

[Imperial]

What ground did Britain hold? They were chased off of mainland Europe like scared rabbits, and then again at Crete.

[Tiberius Tosi]

I wasnt downplaying their material aid but when it comes to actual warfare... the USSR did the grunt work

Could the Americans and British have stomached a battle for Berlin? I doubt it

They were prepared to stomach an invasion of Japan, which would have been even more horrific than a Battle of Berlin.

Anyways, very few people claim that the US solely won WWII and it is usually just people oversimplifying things when they do. It is arguable if Russia could have gone it alone without material aid from the US, but that is all just speculation, and speculation at that.

[Wulfburk]

all of africa, britain (obviously) and india

If Britain had fallen no way the US could do a invasion of europe.

[visser300]

Alright so maybe they were the ones to drop the bombs on Japan but when it comes to Germany that was more or less Russia's achievement in the field with the Americans and commonwealth being a distraction more then anything.

Why do Amuricans think they won it all?

Is it just the medias fault

I have met Americans who if you talk to them about ww2 or even ww1 they act as if their president went over their first hand led the troops from the front and one handedly defeated Germany.

It is worth to note that when the pacific theatre opened, the Japanese army were already exhausted in the ongoing war in China. Americans just came here and eat what Chinese cook an prepare for them. It was the same with Europe Theatre. Americans an its allies came and eat what Russians cook and prepare for them.

[Imperial]

all of africa

With the extreme aid of others

britain (obviously)

How can you hold ground against something that wasn't attacked by ground?

[Vanoi]

What ground did Britain hold? They were chased off of mainland Europe like scared rabbits, and then again at Crete.

North Africa, India. Parts of Burma.

It is worth to note that when the pacific theatre opened, the Japanese army were already exhausted in the ongoing war in China. Americans just came here and eat what Chinese cook an prepare for them. It was the same with Europe Theatre. Americans an its allies came and eat what Russians cook and prepare for them.

Exhausted? Please. China barley held together on its own. Without American aid i very much doubt the Chinese could have survived the Japanese Army in the first place.

[Comrade_Rory]

If the Americans hadn't given us aid before and direct military support when they joined, the Normandy front would never have opened up.

Saying that though, it reallllllyyyy annoys me when some Americans say that if it wasn't for them, us in Britain would be speaking German.
I always tell them that the Battle of Britain marked the abandoning of Operation Sealion, a year before the US joined, which then gave the Americans (and remaining British) a place to launch from into Normandy.

I also think that Germany would have lost with or without the Americans joining, purely from the Russians, because they would have had to have kept forces in France anyway, just in case and the Russians had already started pushing the Germans back by D-Day.

[Imperial]

It is worth to note that when the pacific theatre opened, the Japanese army were already exhausted in the ongoing war in China. Americans just came here and eat what Chinese cook an prepare for them. It was the same with Europe Theatre. Americans an its allies came and eat what Russians cook and prepare for them.

lol @ this. The Japanese were exhausted because they were constantly chasing the Chinese that kept running for their lives.

I
Saying that though, it reallllllyyyy annoys me when some Americans say that if it wasn't for them, us in Britain would be speaking German.

I always say it just to annoy them.

[totalwarguy]

WW2 was a team effort. The Russians' effort on the Eastern Front ate up the most of the German Armed Forces, and the English held their ground by winning the Battle of Britain, but both efforts were supported by a huge amount of material aid from the US. Had that aid not been there could the Russians and English still have held? Probably in some form or another, but that mere question opens up the "what if" floodgates.

Certainly as others have said, the Russian's contribution to victory in WW2 is often downplayed because of the Cold War immediately thereafter. Being American, I'd like to take pride in thinking that without my country's support, victory couldn't have been achieved. But we'll never really know that for sure, because that's not how it happened.