| Troll_Whisperer said: I said not too long ago in some other thread this same thing. The Soviets were the main force behind the allied victory. The USA's role is overrated by Hollywood movies, WWII would have been won regardless of their involvement. They were wary of Russia's influence in Europe and decided to intervene (hence the Marshal Plan, too, they needed Western Europe to side with the US). The UK (they were fighting alone against occupied Europe at some point!) and Russia (they sacrificed millions of lives to inflict the most damage to Germany than any other nation) were the true heroes IMO. It's a pity Russian people had to defend their country against an asshole (Hitler) so another asshole (Stalin) could fuck them over. |
Very wrong. The US was integral in winning the war for the allies. No allied nation provided more than the other.
If it weren't for US involvment with giving the Soviets supplies through lend-lease, the Soviets would have lost quickly. That is not opinion. That is substantiated fact from the mouth of the Soviet General Gregory Zhukov. Had it not been for that, the Soviets would have lost to the Germans, ending the war.
Additionally, you have the US which singlehandedly turned the tide of the Pacific theater. Remember that one? The war on that front consumed a significant amount of men and materiel for the British, as they were defending their colonies. Had we not of interviened there, the Japanese would have likely been able to crush the Chinese, and turn their attention west to India and possibly Siberia, creating a two-front war for the Soviets, allowing them to lose in yet another scenario.
Do some people overstate what the US did? Probably. Every side turned the tide. Every major allied player contributed significantly to the effort. Remove any one from the picture, and the Axis would have won.
Back from the dead, I'm afraid.
