How much of a part do you guys think you played in the winning of WWII?

29 comments

1. British intelligence, Soviet blood, and American steel won the war.

2. I have a feeling that no matter what we say, you’ll happily correct us.

3. Didn’t do shit, was born in the 80s.

4. Soldiers, artillery, equipment, logistics, and intelligence.

   If you’re wondering like what % that a country chipped in, well that’s not the spirit of war I’m afraid. Either you win or lose. We won.

5. We were the essential cog in a large and complex machine. Without our support, The Soviet Union, Brits, and other allies would have fallen eventually. With our support they were able to hold the Axis to, not quite a stalemate, but close to it. Eventually our forces became the weighted blow that turned the tide.

6. At least 70%, given that we were basically the Soviet’s economy and doing 90% of the work in the Pacific, on top of the rest of our operations in the North Atlantic, North Africa, and Europe.

   The notion that the Soviets deserve more credit despite only fighting on one front and creating the problem in the first place by being an *ally* of Germany during the invasion of Poland is laughable.

7. Sine qua non

8. Me personally? I didn’t do shit. But the United States, as the Arsenal of Democracy, played a critical role in winning. The Allies don’t win that war without the industrial capability and support the US brought to the table.

9. I think it’s undeniable that we were crucial in the war, more so industrially than militarily but certainly didn’t win the war singlehandedly or anything.

   I do think the fact we fought Japan more or less singlehandedly is often overlooked by Europeans as well.

   Basically all major parts of the Allies contributed massively to winning the war and it’s possibly that without any one of them the war could have been lost.

10. I mean, the war was being lost before we joined.

11. Pretty much the only ones who consistently fought on all 3 fronts (Europe, North Africa/ME, and East Asia). Not just minor deployments, but whole scale involvement. I mean, USSR didn’t even declare war on Japan until what, like 2 weeks before they surrendered? There’s a quote that is something along the lines of “the war was won with British brains, American steel, and Soviet blood.” That pretty much sums up the war in Europe. Can’t really say the Soviets or the Brits really did much on the other side. It was mainly the Americans and Australians, and of course China.

12. A big part. The US was the key to victory. The Soviet Union had the manpower but the US had the technology, economy, and industrialization to support it.

    All not to mention, we also were heavily engaged with Japan at the time in the Pacific in which other countries weren’t much involved with, at least not until Germany surrendered.

13. During the opening stages of operation Barbarossa the German army was able to push deep into the Soviet Union’s Agricultural producing lands this cut a substantial amount of food production the the Soviet Union in 1941-42 it was with the material aid as well as the substantial aid in food that truly helped the Soviets reorganize their army and begin their major counter offensives in middle to late 1943-44.

14. A large part. We funded Europe for the times we were not involved in the war and D-Day was the operation that turned the war in the Allies favor. Further, the Pacific War was almost entirely won by the US. Don’t forget that war doesn’t just end with the ceasing of hostilities. It also involves rebuilding which the US took a major dominant role in.

15. Anyone who thinks we just piled on is ignorant of the Pacific.

16. Lend-Lease aid from the US helped the Soviets and British a lot. Not to mention the food. The Soviets probably could have pushed Germany back home, but they may not have been able to (or cared to) push Germany out of France. On the Western Front, the UK had successfully fought Germany to a stalemate, and they may have been able to mount the liberation of France with only Empire support, but US forces put a much bigger weight on the Allied side.

    In the Pacific, the US did most of the lifting. British India and Australia did a lot of work on their fronts, too. But the British fleet was stretched pretty thin.

    So, in sum, the US was necessary for Allied total victory in 1945. The Allies still might have been able to win without the US, but it might have been later and/or a negotiated peace, not unconditional surrender.

17. We did a lot. If it wasn’t for us, the war could have very well ended in an axis victory. Lend lease was a huge part of keeping the soviets and the British from losing until the United States could get involved. Our logistics and production rate alone helped out majorly in the war. We could build 1 destroyer every 3 days, and 4 (or more) bombers an hour

    Yes we didn’t lose as many as other nations. But we sure as he’ll turned the tide of the war

18. British intelligence, Russian blood, and American steel.

    We entered late. Germany was going to fall regardless if we entered due to Russia breaking the Eastern front however America was the worlds leading arms manufacturer several years prior to that and we were giving critical supplies to the Brit’s and Russians.

    Human suffering and loss would have been much worse had we done nothing, and there’s a real chance the western front could have held long before the Russians calmed Europe. At the end of the day though, Germany would have likely starved itself into submission.

    Did we win it? No.

    Did we contribute to the victory in major ways? Absolutely. Aside from weapons and intelligence, we fed many troops and civilians.

    You don’t have to love it, you don’t even have to like it, but it doesn’t change the facts.

    Please note, this is overly simplified and ignores huge contributions such as practically giving Brit’s 50 naval destroyers and our USAF bombers broke the eastern front for Russia to advance.

19. A huge part. Sure we got into the war late but in terms of finance and raw industry we saved the allies. Maybe the Brits and Soviets would have won or not been destroyed. But it would have been a hard and brutal fight without American resources or our navy.

    We won the Asian front nearly single handedly but had huge help from the Brits and Aussies.

20. We won it. Without our help all of Europe would be speaking German and Asia would be speaking Japanese.

21. A lot more than the ANZAC that’s for sure.

22. well my great grandma married a us sailor in 1938 with the last name houchins. He has german descent and he fought in world war 2. my great grandpa was a ww2 hero.

23. The US won it in the end by dropping the bombs on Japan. As for how much we contributed to the overall war, there’s going to be debate on that since all the Allies contributed a ton.

24. Simply put: The US was essential to victory.

    That doesn’t mean that the US was the ONLY essential country. It was one of the essential countries.

    The modern idea that the US didn’t do anything until it was all over is a complete rewriting of history.

    Stalin knew it. Churchill knew it.

25. People outside the US like to pretend that the Lend Lease program just didn’t exist, even before the US had boots on the ground it was a massive part of keeping what would eventually be the Allied powers in a winning position.

    People like to say the Soviets won Europe. Maybe in the big picture, but the US retaking of the West is part of the reason the post Soviet block doesn’t reach all the way to France. Even if you don’t believe that, here’s a quote from Khrushev “He (Stalin) stated bluntly that if the United States had not helped us, we would not have won the war.”

    The US did about 90% of the Pacific theater as well, with the British colonies doing a little.

    Ok people inside the US tend to massively overrate the military victories in Europe, and people outside the US tend to massively underrate how much impact the US had on other countries (like the USSRs) success in the war.

26. I wasn’t born yet so not much.

27. Pretty significant. Not to say that the US made the only significant contribution, or even the most significant, but we were one of the top three contributors to the war. Even before we started actively fighting the war, we were providing enormous amounts of resources to the other countries involved in the fighting.

28. This is a question I’m tired of arguing about.

    Did the US win the war single-handedly? No

    Did the US contribute immensely even before our direct involvement? Absolutely

    Could the Soviets have kept trading bodies for time and eventually come out on top? Probably

    We’re the Nazis doomed to fail? Also probably

    This was an extremely complicated, multi-layered, years long war. The material support from the US absolutely shortened the war. There were those at the time who believed that support is why we were winning the war. Absolutely the Soviets took an unbelievably bloody hit, but even if they were destined to win, it’s stupid to suggest that US material support didn’t help. The British were basically the first line of resistance. And who cracked the enigma code?

    Stalin once said “the war was done with British sweat, American steel, and Russian blood.” That sums it up.

29. Well, considering the UK was only able to hold out because of US supplies before we even entered the war, I would say a significant part in the European theater and almost entirely in the Pacific theater since when Australia asked the UK for help, it denied the request causing Australia to turn to the Americans for help.