Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
(And America may have helped our Allies in the War, but yet one cannot help but to recognize that it was a collaborated effort of all the different countries that won the war, not just one. And we were a little late in arriving also!)
^Yes, I know that. But the US wasn't the lone hero. (And I am American and very Patriotic also.) Give credit where credit is due, it was a joint effort.
^Yes, I know that. But the US wasn't the lone hero. (And I am American and very Patriotic also.) Give credit where credit is due, it was a joint effort.
Who said that it was only the United States that won the war? United States helped during and after the war, it may be hard for others to accept it but it's a fact. The United States played a major role during and after WWII.
Despite the atrocities done in the name of Adolph Hitler should we still recognize the military supremacy of the German army in the yrs. that make up WW2?. What army today could demolish the French? Take aim at Britain, leveling cities with aerial bombardments? and all the while dominating the Russians to the East.What army of today would even try?.
These nations owe there existence to the United States entering the War(you're welcome), what would today's Europe look like if the German's had won that war?. Who can deny Germany's military prowess?.
Thought's on Germany's victories in WW2?.
I'd say, that considering 3 to 1 ratio of military casualties, as in 9 million German soldiers to 31 million USSR casualties, that's quite an accomplishment.
But Germans always been good soldiers.
As of your statement that Germany lost war due USA entering it, give me break. USA did it as Red Army was almost crossing German border by then. It was either Europe becomes yey many more Soviet Socialist Republics, or Allies got to do something and fast.
There was so much momentum Red Army had, that Zhukov officially asked Stalin to wipe Allies out of Europe and stop at Atlantic coast. For some reason, Joe told him not to. Which he regretted later, but...
And before you start bragging about USA military might and win in that war, don't forget, that Red Army paid 1.2 million lives, to salvage American troops from Arden slaughter house, when Roosevelt called Stalin and cried "Help!!". Joe was kind enough to pick up phone and tell his "statistics" to advance on East front, to draw troops from Arden. And as any unprepared advance, it cost many many lives.
Audite et alter pars.
You know only American side of history. I know both. And every medal has two sides to it.
I'd say, that considering 3 to 1 ratio of military casualties, as in 9 million German soldiers to 31 million USSR casualties, that's quite an accomplishment.
But Germans always been good soldiers.
As of your statement that Germany lost war due USA entering it, give me break. USA did it as Red Army was almost crossing German border by then. It was either Europe becomes yey many more Soviet Socialist Republics, or Allies got to do something and fast.
There was so much momentum Red Army had, that Zhukov officially asked Stalin to wipe Allies out of Europe and stop at Atlantic coast. For some reason, Joe told him not to. Which he regretted later, but...
And before you start bragging about USA military might and win in that war, don't forget, that Red Army paid 1.2 million lives, to salvage American troops from Arden slaughter house, when Roosevelt called Stalin and cried "Help!!". Joe was kind enough to pick up phone and tell his "statistics" to advance on East front, to draw troops from Arden. And as any unprepared advance, it cost many many lives.
Audite et alter pars.
You know only American side of history. I know both. And every medal has two sides to it.
Hmmm...
I know that Churchill asked Stalin for help, but Roosevelt?
It was a joint effort to defeat Germany, but the U.S. effort pales in comparison to the Soviets. The Soviets played by far the biggest part in defeating Nazi Germany. The Soviets took heavy losses (3 to 1 ratio to the German losses), but they overcame with superior numbers of troops and a little help from the weather.
The U.S. barely even fought Germany until the final year of the war. By the time of D-Day, the Soviets had already essentially defeated the Germans for all practical purposes. The Germans were on the retreat and no longer capable of mounting an offensive. The U.S. invasion of Europe had no impact on defeating Germany. The impact was preventing the Soviets from conquering all of Europe.
The American role in defeating Germany is over-glorified in American media. 2 generations of American children have been taught only half of history. It is actually quite embarrassing. The American role was far greater in defeating Japan. So by that measure, the U.S. role was decisive, but not in defeating Germany.
Despite the atrocities done in the name of Adolph Hitler should we still recognize the military supremacy of the German army in the yrs. that make up WW2?. What army today could demolish the French? Take aim at Britain, leveling cities with aerial bombardments? and all the while dominating the Russians to the East.What army of today would even try?.
These nations owe there existence to the United States entering the War(you're welcome), what would today's Europe look like if the German's had won that war?. Who can deny Germany's military prowess?.
Thought's on Germany's victories in WW2?.
That's the superficial Hollywood version of WWII.
Do some reading on the Russian Front to gain an understanding of who carried the load in defeating Germany.
Another excellent book on "the big picture" is Churchill's Memoirs of the Second World War.
The reality is that by facing both the British Empire and the Soviet Union, Germany had no chance of winning, even w/o US involvement. Our entry into the conflict caused it to end years earlier and resulted in an unconditional surrender rather than a negotiated settlement, like WWI.
Despite the atrocities done in the name of Adolph Hitler should we still recognize the military supremacy of the German army in the yrs. that make up WW2?.
I don't have any problem discussing the military side of WW2 absent the atrocities. I think many people get interested in WW2 by studying the German military. They tended to field some of the more interesting weapon systems which captures peoples imaginations.
As for the "supremacy" that really depends on how you want to compare it. What factors are we looking at? Most of the historians look at it and say, man-for-man the average Wehrmacht soldier was better than his Allied equivalent. Most of that advantage was derived from his training and experience. His equipment was not the best, but it was good and reliable. He had the advantage of good, experienced NCO's and well trained officers.
The German General Staff is also highly regarded as being the best professional military staff in the world at the time. They were innovative, organized and experienced.
When you get into the overall war machine though, which is heavily predicated on logistics, the Germans start to fall short. Far and away the best "war machine" was the US, followed by the Soviet Union. The overall "war machine" is what will win wars while the "individual supremacy" is what will win you a battle.
Then we can get into the tit-for-tat details. In an infantry engagement, American infantry had a large advantage in firepower. A single American platoon would often be confused for an entire company owing to the sheer weight of fire they could lay down. German infantry were easily out-classed in that regard. German artillery was OK at best. They were more accurate and faster then the Soviets who relied on massed fire, but they were woefully inferior to American artillery. American artillery was liberally used by US commanders do to its devastating accuracy and speed of fire. The US didn't need to attack the fortified position, they would just radio in and 45 seconds later the position was blanketed in 105mm HE rounds. Tanks are an area where individual German designs are superior, but those designs were built in very small numbers. The best tank of the war was hands down the Soviet T-34. The German Panther and Tiger were nothing but German efforts to try and build something that could outclass the T-34 and while both the Panther and Tiger were powerful tanks, it didn't matter when the T-34 outnumbered them by a wide margin.
At the end of the day, a war is won on logistics. The ability to recruit, train, equip, mobilize and support forces. The Germans were not the best at that and they lost the war because of it.
Quote:
What army today could demolish the French? Take aim at Britain, leveling cities with aerial bombardments? and all the while dominating the Russians to the East.What army of today would even try?.
To be fair, Germany engaged each of its foes largely individually until the Allied landings in Normandy at which point the war had already been decided. Prior to June 1944, the US and Britain drew off very few German units to fight in the periphery theaters. The war basically went in three phases...
Germany vs. France, Britain and Poland: Poland overwhelmed, France defeated, Britain isolated.
Germany vs. Soviet: From 1941 to 1944 this occupied 95% of the German war effort and is the period where the war was decided on the Eastern Front between the Germans and Soviets.
Germany vs. Soviet, US and Britain: From 1944 to the end Germany was fighting all three main Allies, but is was basically a delaying effort as the war had already been decided at that point.
So, Germany never really fully engaged in a "two front" war in the classical sense until June 1944 and the war had already been decided at that point.
Quote:
These nations owe there existence to the United States entering the War(you're welcome), what would today's Europe look like if the German's had won that war?. Who can deny Germany's military prowess?.
As other's said and I have stated and provided evidence for ad nauseum, the US entry into the war was not "decisive". Germany was going to lose whether the US entered the war or not. The Soviet Union alone would have defeated Germany given the way things played out. The US role was ultimately in drastically shortening the war, nothing else.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Germany was utterly defeated
