Uncategorized

World war II history?


Who won more battles in world war II, USA or russia?

I don’t how one goes about counting battles. If you’re concerned about &quot:stealing glory&quot:, I’m not sure seeing who won the most battles is really the point, anyway.

Let’s say, for example, that Germany didn’t attack the Soviet Union. Germany would then have a tremendous force to defend Western Europe with. Could the USA and Britain still invade somewhere? Maybe, but the cost would be horrific. I can easily imagine the USA and Britain not making peace with Germany, but pretty much just resigning themselves to letting Germany keep what parts of Europe she’d occupied. (I assume the USA takes care of Japan pretty much on its own.)

On the other hand, let’s say Germany didn’t declare war on the US after Peal Harbor. The US takes care of Japan, again, but Britain can’t invade Western Europe on its own. The Soviet Union does exactly the same thing it did in real life, trading land for time, and then counter-attacking when Germany is overextended. Without American aid, the counter-attack is going to be tougher, but I have no doubt that the outcome will be the same. And then with no US, French, and British armies in central Germany, the Soviet Union continues through Germany, maybe stopping at the French border (or maybe not).

I think US involvement in WWII was very important. But I think the Soviet Union had a better chance to defeat Germany without the US than the other way around.

It is not unexpected that Americans would be interested in, and be taught about, American involvement in WWII. Also, as the Cold War started, there may have been reasons for minimizing the Soviet Union’s contribution in American minds.

I haven’t seen the youtube video, so I don’t know what the &quot:idiot&quot: is claiming. I think history should be reinterpreted if it gets us closer to the truth. Recognizing the Soviet Union’s contributions to defeating Germany takes nothing away from the contributions made by America and the American people.

****************
This proves nothing, of course, but I was a hobby wargamer (carboard counters and hex maps) in the 1970’s. Once I played Germany in the SPI game &quot:WWII&quot:, which really only covered the European Theater. I did exactly what I outlined in my first paragraph, and never invaded the Soviet Union. It meant I was limited to a &quot:marginal&quot: victory, and could not possibly achieve a &quot:decisive&quot: victory, but there was absolutely nothing the Allied player could do about it. All the units that would have been in Russia were defending the coast of Western Europe, making it impregnable. (The Allied player was very annoyed.)

****************
Hmmm … do you think the US would have used the atomic bomb against Germany if the Soviet Union hadn’t been in the war?

I can think of a few battles the US won against Germany. D-Day (with help of the British and Canadians), the Normandy Campaign (ditto the help), the Battle of the Bulge, North Africa (with help from the British and Free French), some battles in Italy. I do not know the number.

The Soviets lost many battles in the beginning. They won Stalingrad. Kursk. The Battle of Berlin in the end. The reason the Soviets lost so many men was because of the way they fought battles–little in the way of tactics and no regard for lives. They won many battles before they got to Berlin. Again, I do not know the numbers. Also, keep in mind that a battle on the Eastern Front that involved maybe 3,000 men per side would be considered a skirmish, not a battle. In the West, that would be considered a battle– a small one, but still a battle.

The Suez Canal is in Egypt which used to be a relevant route to connect Britain with the war in the a long way East. It was once also the important thing to the Mediterranean. Britain retained three vital bases within the Mediterranean for the duration of the struggle which all trusted each and every different. They have been Egypt, Malta and Gibraltar: if one fell the others normally would and the Mediterranean and North Africa would be thoroughly managed via the Axis. This is able to provide Hitler access to the colossal oil reserves of Iraq and Iran and enable the Germans to open a southern front through Iran in opposition to the Soviets which might have outflanked the Soviet defenders at Stalingrad. It might also allow the Germans to link up with the Japs by way of the Indian Ocean. Bernard Law Montgomery’s victory against Rommel at El Alamein converted the whole steadiness of the conflict and used to be the predominant single victory. If he had lost Hitler could in all likelihood have gained with the aid of 1944

I think usa won more.
Because russia army dead more than US army.
Plus, USA got more benefit after the war.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *