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.
I have seen this particularly in the past 10-15 years or so, Brits who claim that it wasnt the US that helped them defeat Germany, but in fact it was Canada, or themselves or some combination of other countries other than America that help save them from the Nazis.
I know around the world associating with America is not "cool" anymore, but why deny something that ultimately did happen just because you dont like the country?
I have seen this particularly in the past 10-15 years or so, Brits who claim that it wasnt the US that helped them defeat Germany, but in fact it was Canada, or themselves or some combination of other countries other than America that help save them from the Nazis.
I know around the world associating with America is not "cool" anymore, but why deny something that ultimately did happen just because you dont like the country?
Americans seem to think that Britons 'would be speaking German' if it wasn't for them and as a Briton I admit that attitude 'grates'. The truth is that Britain had already seen off any threat of German invasion before the US was even in the war (Battle of Britain), of course the US and Canada and Russia and Australia, New Zealand etc were all vital with the war effort. The truth is that Britain wouldn't have been able to invade Europe without assistance, D Day wouldnt have happened without the US - conversely it also wouldn't have happened without the UK. The likely scenario of a war without either Britain or the US is that the Soviets would have eventually overcome the Germans and the 'Iron curtain' would have been further West! So yes of course the US helped (along with all the other allies) but the US did not 'save our ass' as they continually harp on about!!
I have seen this particularly in the past 10-15 years or so, Brits who claim that it wasnt the US that helped them defeat Germany, but in fact it was Canada, or themselves or some combination of other countries other than America that help save them from the Nazis.
What does "I have seen this..." mean? Is it the same as "I believe...."?
Before we run with this, could you please provide some reference (a survey document or peer reviewed study), even a legitimate journal or news article that confirms this?
Germany was slowly starving GB of food, commodities, and war material. The U-boats were having a devastating effect. And, when Germany chased the British & French from Europe at Dunkerque, they fled only with their uniforms leaving all their equipment behind.
So prior to Pearl Harbor and USA's direct involvement in the war, the US's supply shipments and military hardware was about all that kept GB afloat. I doubt that Canada had the capacity to sustain them without the US massive contribution.
I don't think many of those familiar with history think that at all. Certainly Churchill knew they wouldn't last unless they at least got aid shipped to them. That they didn't seek peace is their victory really. Can you think what it would have been like if Hitler had continued to develop the V1 missile alone.
Americans seem to think that Britons 'would be speaking German' if it wasn't for them and as a Briton I admit that attitude 'grates'. The truth is that Britain had already seen off any threat of German invasion before the US was even in the war (Battle of Britain), of course the US and Canada and Russia and Australia, New Zealand etc were all vital with the war effort. The truth is that Britain wouldn't have been able to invade Europe without assistance, D Day wouldnt have happened without the US - conversely it also wouldn't have happened without the UK. The likely scenario of a war without either Britain or the US is that the Soviets would have eventually overcome the Germans and the 'Iron curtain' would have been further West! So yes of course the US helped (along with all the other allies) but the US did not 'save our ass' as they continually harp on about!!
First off, most Americans don't think it through that far. However, it's pretty evident that had the US remained neutral, GB would gave probably lost at some point. You mentioned the battle of great Britain. Some of those pilots we Americans and Canadians. That did help but, a good portion of those munitions and material came from the US.
It was rumored that Churchill was quoted as saying;" we will fight to the last American.".true or not, you get the point. Hitler, at the time, was not looking to conquer GB but rather, pressure them into a truce. He believed he could get favorable terms from GB....or as he was quoted, they are like us, they are like our people.....don't forget the royal ties to Germany in previous generations. Blood is usually thicker than water.
If you were that confident to the contrary, explain Chamberlain's desperate attempts for a peace. Miserable failure born out of real fear that Germany could and would put the hurt on. Hitler simply broke off that one last push by Goring to save resources. Had he made the push, it's pretty evident that your finest hour would have become your darkest hour. Take away the supply convoys and GB was toast. The British air force was one luftwaffe wave away from total capitulation.
The demise of the light BS HMS Hood and the 3 inch decks proves how out of date and obsolete your navy was at the time. So was ours. The difference? We could pump them out like autos....the arsenal of democracy saved you, France, and us. It was the boost to keep all allies going. We didn't do it alone but, had we remained neutral, no convoys, no bullets, no bombs, no aircraft, cannon, or men?????
Please. We aren't rubbing it in, just stating logistical facts. Hard to fight a war on spirit alone. Even harder with just bolt action rifles and 18 pounders. Bren carriers? Cute. Spitfires? Beautiful until you roller coasted 3 times. Carburation vs. fuel injection? Just ask the ME 109 pilots.. Just think about it. Think about it.
It helped the soviets as well. Can you imagine how many MORE soviets would have died had Hitler been able to fight on just one front? I believe had it gone on, GB would have sued for a truce by 1942....
You should probably thank the Japs. Thanks to the ire they raised with a sleeping America, you gained our commitment even if it was a bit self-serving. Look at D-Day. You helped with a lot fishing boats and troops....want to review that war material subject again? Contrast that to DunKirk......shame we weren't involved then....huh?
While we certainly did not win the war alone, we sure did add a certain interesting dynamic to it....while the Sherman tank was anything but stellar, it was sure nice to have almost 20,000 of them made along with the crews and shells to man them. It didn't suck.
Help? Please, we did more than help. We're just glad you are an ally.
P.S. please forgive our President for not showing up at PM Thatchers funeral. Most of us are embarrassed beyond measure. You stood side by side with us through the cold war and in no small part thanks to her and therefore, it was disgraceful that our sitting president was not there to pay our proper respects. Forgive our president for he knows not what he does....ever. Shameful shameful shameful. We can only hope the British citizenry forgives us over time. One of the biggest US diplomatic blunders to date.
I don't care what the Brits say. Without US they would of gotten stomped. It would of just taken a bit more time but make no bones the German war machine would of whooped them. Without our war ego fort of supplies and food and ammo and ranks and planes and parts and guns and everything else that was needed to fight a war they would of lost. You think New Zealand or Australia would of has the resources to send equipment from the bottom of the world? Hardly.
Nobody likes to say they would of lost or they lost. They would of held out a bit more. Hitters big mistake was to try and fight two war fronts and the Japanese attacking Pearl Harbor. If they would of waited On the Pearl Harbor attack, kicked the snot out of GB then hit the Russians front and back the rest of the Asiatic countries would of folded pretty quick.
At that point I firmly believe we could be fighting on our soil.
Americans seem to think that Britons 'would be speaking German' if it wasn't for them and as a Briton I admit that attitude 'grates'. The truth is that Britain had already seen off any threat of German invasion before the US was even in the war (Battle of Britain), of course the US and Canada and Russia and Australia, New Zealand etc were all vital with the war effort. The truth is that Britain wouldn't have been able to invade Europe without assistance, D Day wouldnt have happened without the US - conversely it also wouldn't have happened without the UK. The likely scenario of a war without either Britain or the US is that the Soviets would have eventually overcome the Germans and the 'Iron curtain' would have been further West! So yes of course the US helped (along with all the other allies) but the US did not 'save our ass' as they continually harp on about!!
One thing your post leaves out is the threat that was posed to Britain by German U-boats. Up until the last half of 1942, the Germans were sinking record amounts of shipping. At some points, ships were going down faster than they could be built. If America hadn't convoyed food, fuel, and armaments to Britain its very likely the island would have eventually been starved out.
In the short run, I agree that a cross-channel invasion was unlikely. Hitler lacked air supremacy and landing craft to execute an invasion of Britain.
Nevertheless, the truth is that Britain was much weaker than Germany was in terms of any measure you look at: 1 armaments; 2. population; 3. access to resources; 4. numbers of factories. After Germany occupied most of continental Europe they were in a virtually impregnable position.
I think rather than attacking one another though, the USA ought to acknowledge the fact that Britain was fighting this war over 2 years before it chose to enter it. At some points, September 1940 to June 1941, Britain was fighting Germany by itself. On the other hand, I think Britain ought to acknowledge that America's superior industrial strength is what turned the tide of battle and made victory in Europe a certain proposition. Neither country loses by acknowledging what is true. Both our nations--and the USSR--are responsible for the defeat of Nazi Germany.
I have seen this particularly in the past 10-15 years or so, Brits who claim that it wasnt the US that helped them defeat Germany, but in fact it was Canada, or themselves or some combination of other countries other than America that help save them from the Nazis.
I know around the world associating with America is not "cool" anymore, but why deny something that ultimately did happen just because you dont like the country?
It depends on what you mean by 'defeat Germany'.
I highly doubt there is anyone who, as you say, claim that it wasnt the US that helped them defeat Germany. That the U.S. helped is an indisputable fact. Whether or not Germany would have been defeated without U.S. help, or whether or not Britain would have been 'speaking German' are other matters of debate. Let's talk about them.
First, Germany was not going to conquer the British Isles. By the spring of 1941, the British had gotten the u-boat situation under control. While they weren't yet winning the Battle of the Atlantic, they were holding their own and gradually developing better and better techniques for dealing with the problem. There's a long way from a civilian population being uncomfortable to being so desperate that they run up the white flag. And the British always had the upper hand in the Battle of Britain, was producing more aircraft than Germany by that time, suffered fewer losses during the battle, and had greater pilot reserves had things gone south. And even if Germany had managed to somehow achieve air superiority, the Royal Navy was still going to absolutely maul whatever feeble invasion force the Kriegsmarine could cobble together. Almost four years later, the Allieds were vastly better prepared to launch a cross-channel invasion, with far better equipment, with absolute air and sea superiority, and it was still a move fraught with risk. Had things gone differently, with someone other than Churchill in office, the UK might have sued for some peace that ended the war between the two countries - which is what Hitler was trying to force. But not a peace that involved an occupation of any sort. Hitler's primary interest was always to attack east, and the war in the west was merely a means to that end (eliminating a potential second front). When he failed there, he went east anyway.
Second, while absent the U.S. there almost certainly would never have been any British-Canadian invasion along the lines of Overlord, the Soviets would likely have eventually rolled back the Germans - all the way to the Channel, in all likelihood. So Germany was probably going to lose anyway.
This is not to say that the United States didn't profoundly impact the course of the war. Obviously, we did. But there will always be Americans who arrogantly overplay the American contribution to the war and there will always be Brits who dismissively underplay it. Such is the way petty nationalism manifests itself in these discussions.
Happily, there are plenty of honest people who can have rational discussions that don't devolve into spiteful nationalistic rants.
I have seen this particularly in the past 10-15 years or so, Brits who claim that it wasnt the US that helped them defeat Germany, but in fact it was Canada, or themselves or some combination of other countries other than America that help save them from the Nazis.
I know around the world associating with America is not "cool" anymore, but why deny something that ultimately did happen just because you dont like the country?
It really depends on how you define the term "bail out". From the British perspective, much of the worst times for the British happened between the shocking fall of France and Hitler's invasion of the Soviet Union. After Barbarossa, most of the German war effort was concentrated on the Eastern front and the worst of the immediate danger to the British Isles had passed. This is BEFORE the United States entered the war in Dec 1941.
Of course from the American perspective, the USA was already supplying the British with supplies and equipment. Also before Pearl Harbor, the US Navy and planes were escorting convoys and even fighitng U-Boats long before Pearl Harbor. It was an American pilot, Leonard Smith, who found and spotted the German battleship Bismarck less then 24 hours before the German ship would have gotten clearly away. And the USA did other useful things like garrison Iceland so the British could spare up troops to fight elsewhere.
And of course, without the United States there is no way the Western Allies could have liberated France and other parts of Europe. Britain, Canada, Australia etc. were not strong enough by themselves.
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.
Why do Brits deny US bailed them out in WW2?
