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.
Most American actually do believe without them Germany would have won the war. The US propaganda machine says so, so you can't blame the average US citizen for believing that. FDR and his advisors believed that Germany would be defeated without US intervention.
I recall many old WW2 vets saying 'the Yanks came in at the last minute'. That was largely true. The Germans had been stopped in the west by the British at the Battle of Britain, and the RN wiped out most of their surface navy, and they were stopped in the east at Moscow in Dec 1941, the month the USA came into the war. Germany were now going nowhere. By the time the the USA first had boots on the ground, in North Africa, the Germans (well Axis) had been defeated at two key battles of Stalingrad and El Alemein. These two defeats meant Germany was on the run for sure.
This is another American misconception. The British had the largest empire the world had ever seen. The Turkish ambassador stated that the British would win as they could raise an army of 40 million. This point was given credence when an army of 2.6 million was assembled in India to fight the Japanese.
History has that wrong. In 1938 the Royal Navy was on full alert as was the French and Soviet armies. If the Germans went into Czechoslovakia in 1938, they would be fighting, French, British, Czech, Soviet and most probably Polish forces, "all at once", on two fronts. It was diplomatically put to Hitler that if he wanted war he had it. Hitler backed down. Chamberlain and France inexplicably gave the Sudetenland to the Germans. They gave away a part of someone else's country. That is not the common view of Munich in 1938.
Prof. Adam Tooze: Wages of Destruction:
Page 273
"If Hitler had wanted war on 1 October 1938, he could have had it. The French and British had reached the point at which they could make no further concessions. The armies of France and the Soviet Union had mobilized. The Royal Navy stood at full alert. On 9 September 1938 it was Hitler who stepped back not his opponents"
Page 274
"Hitler backed down and accepted the extraordinarily generous settlement on offer at the hastily convened conference in Munich. In so doing, he almost certainly saved his regime from disaster."
Canadian troops, fought in France in 1940. The USA did indeed provide the British with valuable assistance in defeating the Axis powers for sure.
LOL....at your alleged "U.S. propaganda machine." Where is it? Show me. I'm a huge history buff, read all the time. I work at a college. And, funny thing, I never came across your Machine. There are thousands of books on WWII written by American authors and any of them worth their salt lay the facts out of WWII in Europe and the events leading up to it with objectivity and accuracy. I've never read one that boasted that without the U.S England would have stood no chance against the Wehrmacht and the Kriegsmarine. Funny, I just read a book on Alan Turing. Do you know who he was? What he did? For my money what the Brit Government did to him was an evil sin and inexcusable. I think he was a War Hero. Maybe their most valuable? So here I am an American standing up for this Brit. I am not alone.
So, yeah, you clearly heard a random anecdote from some American that you felt insulted the British effort in WWII, or unfairly boasted of our role in it. And so you took this and ran with it and then enraged in some cherry picking and what we call information bias and tried to create fictional Propaganda Machines. But along your journey you screwed up when you ran into a guy (me! LOL) who actually knows something about the matter. And also about deceptional rhetorical and debate tactics. Ooops. LOL.
So enlighten me please as to what your REAL point or agenda is here? And in under 100 words or so would be nice. Thank you.
I rarely agree with John about anything, but he does have a point here. Hollywood has been cranking out films for a half century that portray America as the country that defeated Hitler and saved Europe. OK, they're American film studios making movies for American audiences, so that's to be expected, but still - the effect is that quite a lot of people have grown up thinking that World War II in the European Theatre was between Germany and the United States, with a little help from those English guys and then there was that Russian business too... they had some involvement, but not that big of a deal because we already had the war in hand.
It's pretty annoying to me, and I'm an American. So I can see why Brits would get sick of it after a while. And, let's face it - the average American is stupid enough that they get most of their historical education from watching movies and TV.
There are thousands of books on WWII written by American authors and any of them worth their salt lay the facts out of WWII in Europe and the events leading up to it with objectivity and accuracy.
The word objectivity I find odd in many US books.
Quote:
Funny, I just read a book on Alan Turing. Do you know who he was? What he did? For my money what the Brit Government did to him was an evil sin and inexcusable. I think he was a War Hero. Maybe their most valuable? So here I am an American standing up for this Brit. I am not alone.
I have a degree in computer science. I once lived about 10-15 walk from where Turing lived and also lived not far from Bletchley Park - I have been there many times. I also wanted to volunteer to rebuild some of the old WW2 computers, but time stopped me. Here is one you can tell your friends. Turing's greatest contribution to the advance of computing was that he insisted the man-machine interface be represented in "symbols" - what you are looking at right now. Yes, you are right about how he was treated. Everything about it was secret until 1976, no one knew who he was or what he had done. The Manchester police are Moderator cut: bleep anyway even at the best of times. Manchester had the audacity to name a road after him.
If you think the US are objective look at those History Channel docs. Look at Hollywood! People in the UK had a go at Attenbourgh when he made "A Bridge Too Far", clearly making out the Brits at times were incompetent at Arnhem (He showed the 86th taking the end of a bridge which did not happen as the British tanks were already there when they got to the bridge). He did admit the film was meant primarily for "a US audience". Also read some of the drivel that people write here - and they genuinely believe it. When told the facts and that it was not quite what they think it is, they just do not believe it. Look at the recent one that most Americans here believe that they overwhelmingly defeated the Japanese and all other contributions were token. The reality is very different. I would guarantee that not one American here knew that the UK and the USSR jointly invaded Iran before the USA were even in the war, until I wrote it here.
Quote:
But along your journey you screwed up when you ran into a guy (me! LOL) who actually knows something about the matter.
Don't flatter yourself. What you are implying is that I am telling lies. I do no such thing. If you are so objective I would have seen you having a go at the jingoistic US contributors who clearly spout Hollywood history.
Last edited by mensaguy; 08-29-2015 at 04:20 AM..
Reason: language
It's pretty annoying to me, and I'm an American. So I can see why Brits would get sick of it after a while. And, let's face it - the average American is stupid enough that they get most of their historical education from watching movies and TV.
The effect of this, is that many British kids even believe the Hollywood angle of WW2. I got a lot of my WW2 education listening to uncles, neighbours and old guys I worked with. Captivating stories. I have been given first hand accounts of D-Day by many men (my uncle was on the 1st wave), Arnhem, Falaise, Bergen-Belsen, Sinkings of the Graf Spree and Bismarck, Japanese prison camps, Burmese jungle fighting, Dunkirk retreat (a neighbour had a part of his leg blown off), AA guns in the Battle of Britain, AA guns in Malta (uncles), the receiving end of German air bombings (my mother), V1s dropping (next to my block), girls who test flew Mustangs and delivered them to their units (my auntie) etc, etc. Even American guys I worked with, one was on a carrier only 50 miles off Tokyo, one was on one of those rocket firing ships in the South Pacific. Books filled it all in.
Editing a quoted post in a way that modifies the meaning is dishonest. OTOH, it is also dishonest to wait until your own post has been quoted and then go back and edit it to change the meaning. Maybe you didn't know, but moderators can see the edit history for posts, so I can see what happened with the quoted posts in the past few pages.
If somebody edits your post when they quote it, please report the problem, but don't bother to reply. We'll fix the problem, but your reply just makes the problem worse, escalates the issue, and adds work to the fix.
Discussions about History should be all about honesty, truth, and accuracy.
The Russians stop, look at him and ask, "How many troops at El Alamein? How many tanks at El Alamein? How many Germans did you kill?" Once the British general gives his answers, the Russians respond, "Ah...no wonder we never heard of it...we call that a skirmish, not a battle."
The Soviets had little idea of the big picture of WW2, only focusing on the Germans in front of them. If El Alemein was lost the Germans may have circled the Med; one of their aims. The consequences of that are immense. The Germans would have Middle Eastern oil and made the Med an Axis lake. They would be aiming to meet up with the Japanese somewhere from the Middle East to Burma. The Germans did have the Mesopotamia plan and this would be a part of that. The Germans were enacting that plan by operating U-Boats with Japanese subs out of Penang in Malaya. Once the Med was an Axis lake and the Indian Ocean neutralised.......
If the Germans had won at El Alamein it would have been for nothing. Why? Torch landings.
The Germans would have gone to the Middle East and the oil fields. The Torch landings would have been greatly opposed if the Axis had on the southern Med coast. The RN would be out of the Med and the Italian navy, with the small German navy, would have opposed any landings.
Germans were stretched complexly trying to supply the army in Africa from Benghazi and Tripoli. The longer they were from their supply ports the weaker they were. So indicated in German post-war studies conducted at the behest of the U.S. Army Foreign Military Studies. Montgomery experienced the same in reverse as he pursued Rommel west after Alamein. Until Benghazi and Tripoli were made operational for use.
There was no German navy in the Med. except for the TB flotillas engaged in Aegean escort as that was German responsibility. The Italians were reaching the end of their fuel reserves.
And as a topping point. In a few weeks we would have the Stalingrad battle and Operation Uranus to draw away further German resources from the Med as actually occurred.
Germans were stretched complexly trying to supply the army in Africa from Benghazi and Tripoli.
It's a What IF. If the Germans won at El Alemein and took Egypt and the RN naval base at Alexandria. The Med would an Axis lake, meaning they could roam freely. Once they take Egypt, the German navy can come down to the Med, although much of it may be sunk by the RN on the way down as they have to get past the UK. The Japanese navy may give a hand as the Germans would have the Suez Canal.
If Germany won at El Alemein, Allied thinking would be different and maybe Torch cancelled.
Last edited by John-UK; 08-29-2015 at 09:19 AM..
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.
What you are implying is that I am telling lies. I do no such thing. If you are so objective I would have seen you having a go at the jingoistic US contributors who clearly spout Hollywood history.
