Which country is it?

[Slainte]

Also um, didn't germany take france, on the verge of taking Britian, and it wasn't until the Americans entered, thet the allies really had a chance.

This is the American version.

Every country has a different version, the UK version of WWII has us gallantly fending off the Germans all by our lonesome.

Neutral versions tend to give the Soviets the most credit for defeating the Germans, Britain was more of a nuisance and the US was a bit of a catalyst, all the hard work was done in the East.

If you go to Poland they have stories about how the only reason the UK won the Battle of Britain was because of their pilots! So they can say they won WWII in their own way :mrgreen:

The Greeks have tonnes of stories about how much grief they caused the axis powers too.

Everyone has their own little claim to WWII.

 

[partier9]

This is the American version.

Every country has a different version, the UK version of WWII has us gallantly fending off the Germans all by our lonesome.

Neutral versions tend to give the Soviets the most credit for defeating the Germans, Britain was more of a nuisance and the US was a bit of a catalyst, all the hard work was done in the East.

If you go to Poland they have stories about how the only reason the UK won the Battle of Britain was because of their pilots! So they can say they won WWII in their own way :mrgreen:

The Greeks have tonnes of stories about how much grief they caused the axis powers too.

Everyone has their own little claim to WWII.

Indeed the russians were a big part of defeating the germans. Also britian in the battle of britians preformed incredible. The polish were indeed very importent throught the war. Also Hitler was a big part for why his country fell. But if the US hadn't sent supplies to Russia and Britian before we entered who knows what could of happened. And if we hadn't eventully entered the war germany would of won.

 

[Sir Loin]

Willie was talking about the Italians???

 

[Panache]

Indeed the russians were a big part of defeating the germans. Also britian in the battle of britians preformed incredible. The polish were indeed very importent throught the war. Also Hitler was a big part for why his country fell. But if the US hadn't sent supplies to Russia and Britian before we entered who knows what could of happened. And if we hadn't eventully entered the war germany would of won.

And what would have happened if the Russians hadn't entered the war?

 

[partier9]

And what would have happened if the Russians hadn't entered the war?

????????????????????????????????

I don't know, but they would of anyways. Hitler hated Stalin. Even if they hadn't been allies with the Russians at one point. Germany still would of invaded. So at some point or another Russia would of entered. But if they hadn't Europe might be under german rule.

 

[Slainte]

Indeed the russians were a big part of defeating the germans.

In terms of lives lost they were far and away the biggest. A lot of people don't realise how much more brutal the Eastern front was than the Western front.

Normandy and the Bulge were skirmishes compared to the mega battles over there!

The polish were indeed very importent throught the war.

:rofl

Not really, they just tell themselves that.

But if the US hadn't sent supplies to Russia and Britian before we entered who knows what could of happened. And if we hadn't eventully entered the war germany would of won.

I'm not so sure, by the time American forces set foot in Europe the Germans were already crumbling under Soviet pressure.

Now that the cold war is over and WWII is fading from living memory I think there is going to be a fair amount of revision of how much the Western Allies really contributed to defeating the Nazis.

 

[Iriemon]

The germans were about to take paris they were only a few miles outside of it. And the French army was in full retreat. Guess who saved the day? The Americans who had just arrived in europe held of the advancing german troops. Also France did't learn its lesson from WW1 in WW2 France fell the exact same way germany was able to invade in WW1, though they never got to paris. The french thinking that germany would attack directly built a giant wall of fortifications bewteen france and germany. So germany went through Belgium. Germany did it in both world wars and both times france had to retreat.

The US high school version of the world wars. That's why so many Americans have distorted views.

[Edit: This was erroneously posted. See subsequent post]

 

[MSgt]

This is the American version.

Every country has a different version, the UK version of WWII has us gallantly fending off the Germans all by our lonesome.

Neutral versions tend to give the Soviets the most credit for defeating the Germans, Britain was more of a nuisance and the US was a bit of a catalyst, all the hard work was done in the East.

If you go to Poland they have stories about how the only reason the UK won the Battle of Britain was because of their pilots! So they can say they won WWII in their own way :mrgreen:

The Greeks have tonnes of stories about how much grief they caused the axis powers too.

Everyone has their own little claim to WWII.

But every one of them can share in equal blame for condemning Poland behind a wall of oppression directly after. "Germany invaded Poland and shows no signs of stopping? This will not do." Years later......."your free Poland......but we've given you to Russia! But rejoice.....France is free."

 

[MSgt]

The US high school version of the world wars. That's why so many Americans have distorted views.

Americans have distorted views about almost everything outside their borders.

 

[partier9]

In terms of lives lost they were far and away the biggest. A lot of people don't realise how much more brutal the Eastern front was than the Western front.

Normandy and the Bulge were skirmishes compared to the mega battles over there!

Stalins killed millions of his own people before the war. He just Sent wave after wave after wave of men to wear down the germans.
World War II in the USSR

In October 1941 the U.S. began supplying the USSR under the Lend-Lease Act.

rofl

Not really, they just tell themselves that.

Polish contribution to World War II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Later, Polish pilots fought in the Battle of Britain, where the Polish 303 Fighter Squadron claimed the highest number of kills of any Allied squadron.

Yes not importent.:mrgreen:

I'm not so sure, by the time American forces set foot in Europe the Germans were already crumbling under Soviet pressure.

Now that the cold war is over and WWII is fading from living memory I think there is going to be a fair amount of revision of how much the Western Allies really contributed to defeating the Nazis.

When the americans along with the british set foot in france they made a plan to attack the germans from two sides. West from America and the brits, and east from the russians. The combined strength ended up deafeting the germans.

 

[Iriemon]

The germans were about to take paris they were only a few miles outside of it. And the French army was in full retreat. Guess who saved the day? The Americans who had just arrived in europe held of the advancing german troops. Also France did't learn its lesson from WW1 in WW2 France fell the exact same way germany was able to invade in WW1, though they never got to paris. The french thinking that germany would attack directly built a giant wall of fortifications bewteen france and germany. So germany went through Belgium. Germany did it in both world wars and both times france had to retreat.

The US high school version of the wars.

The German army never made it within 40 miles of Paris in 1918. The did mount a last desparate offense. But it wasn't the Americans who stopped them:

The front moved to within 120 kilometers (75 mi) of Paris. Three heavy Krupp railway guns fired 183 shells on the capital, causing many Parisians to flee. The initial offensive was so successful that Kaiser Wilhelm II declared 24 March a national holiday. Many Germans thought victory was near. After heavy fighting, however, the offensive was halted. Lacking tanks or motorised artillery, the Germans were unable to consolidate their gains. The sudden stop was also a result of the four AIF (Australian Imperial Forces) divisions that were "rushed" down, thus doing what no other army had done and stopping the German advance in its tracks. During that time the first Australian division was hurriedly sent north again to stop the second German breakthrough.

World War I - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Allied high command was in near panic. Pétain told Haig that if the German attacks continued, he would have to abandon contact with the British and fall back to cover Paris. Ludendorff, however, had already missed his moment of opportunity. His troops were reaching the end of their endurance, and fresh British and French reserves were arriving. Slowly the German momentum died. As a decisive effort, the offensive failed. It had merely gained ground. On April 4 and 5, Hutier launched one final thrust toward Amiens, creating a salient (outwardly projecting battle line). Australian troops east of Villers-Bretonneux stopped them.

World War I - MSN Encarta

It was only after this battle and the Germans were stopped that Pershing agreed to allow US troops join in British and French forces:

An Allied conference on March 26th at Doullens, France, had established French general Ferdinand Foch as commander in chief of all Allied forces on the western front. Soon afterwards, General Pershing finally agreed to allow American troops to join British and French forces in small formations. Pershing had originally insisted on keeping American troops together rather than dividing them amongst the British and French armies. His decision was a great boost to Allied morale.

World War I - MSN Encarta

American divisions, which Pershing had sought to field as an independent force, were assigned to the depleted French and British Empire commands on 28 March.

World War I - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It wasn't until six months later that enough trained Americans were in France to actually form an army:

September 12, 1918, was the beginning of the end for the German armies in the west. The recently created U.S. First Army assaulted a small salient in the area of Saint-Mihiel, southeast of Verdun. The Battle of Saint-Mihiel was the first appearance of a U.S. force large enough to be called an army.

World War I - MSN Encarta

As to the last German offensive of the war, again, it wasn't the Americans who stopped it:

Then on July 15th 1918, Luderndorff ordered the last offensive by the German Army in World War One. It was a disaster. The Germans advanced two miles into land held by the Allies but their losses were huge. The French Army let the Germans advance knowing that their supply lines were stretched to the limit. Then the French hit back on the Marne and a massive French counter-attack took place. Between March and July 1918, the Germans lost one million men.

::The German Spring Offensive of 1918::

 

[Iriemon]

... Also France did't learn its lesson from WW1 in WW2 France fell the exact same way germany was able to invade in WW1, though they never got to paris. The french thinking that germany would attack directly built a giant wall of fortifications bewteen france and germany. So germany went through Belgium. Germany did it in both world wars and both times france had to retreat.

Bub is right. WWII was totally different in how the Germans attacked.

The allied command expected the Germans to do the same thing in WWII as WWI. They had the Maginot line to the South, so the cream of the British and French army were sent into Berlguim to repel the expected German attack thru the low countries.

The Allied command did not think that panzers could get thru the Ardennes forest, which lie in France and Belgium between the maginot line and the plains of Belguim. They miscalculated both that and the speed of the German blietzkrieg. The Germans plowed thru the forest and their panzer divisions slashed to the coast, cutting off the best French and British divisions in Belgium. The allied command also tactically combined their tanks with infantry, which did not give them an effective mobile force to counter the panzers.

Cut off and without supplies, the allied forces fought bravely but you can't fight long without supplies in modern warfare. The French could not hold out, and the Brits fled to the coast, evacuating their men and Dunkirk leaving all their equipment behind.

 

[partier9]

American divisions, which Pershing had sought to field as an independent force, were assigned to the depleted French and British Empire commands on 28 March. A Supreme War Council of Allied forces was created at the Doullens Conference on 5 November 1917.[56] General Foch was appointed as supreme commander of the allied forces. Haig, Petain and Pershing retained tactical control of their respective armies; Foch assumed a coordinating role, rather than a directing role and the British, French and U.S. commands operated largely independently.[56]

Following Operation Michael, Germany launched Operation Georgette against the northern English channel ports. The Allies halted the drive with limited territorial gains for Germany. The German Army to the south then conducted Operations Blücher and Yorck, broadly towards Paris. Operation Marne was launched on 15 July, attempting to encircle Reims and beginning the Second Battle of the Marne. The resulting Allied counterattack marked their first successful offensive of the war.

By 20 July, the Germans were back at their Kaiserschlacht starting lines,[citation needed] having achieved nothing. Following this last phase of the war in the West, the German Army never again regained the initiative. German casualties between March and April 1918 were 270,000, including many highly trained stormtroopers.

so we replaced the depleted french and english troops. from your wiki article:mrgreen:

Battle of Belleau Wood - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In a battle noteworthy in the USA because of both its extremely bloody nature (such bloody battles being the norm for French, imperial and German armies of the time) and its close proximity to the French capital of Paris, the American Expeditionary Forces (AEF) launched a counter-attack designed to stop the German advance. The Second Division was tasked with taking the woods and the US 4th Marine Brigade, with its 5th and 6th Marine Regiments, was sent forward. In order to enter and take the woods, it was necessary to advance across an open field of wheat that was continuously swept with German machine gun and artillery fire. After Marines were repeatedly urged to turn back by retreating French forces, Marine Captain Lloyd W. Williams of the 2nd Battalion, 5th Marines uttered the now-famous retort "Retreat? Hell, we just got here."[3]

On 6 June, the casualties were the highest in Marine Corps history to that point.[4] Overall, the woods were attacked by the Marines a total of six times before they could successfully expel the Germans. They fought off more than four divisions of Germans, often reduced to using only their bayonets or fists in hand-to-hand combat. In order to rally his platoon of pinned-down Marines, Gunnery Sergeant Dan Daly encouraged them with what would become another famous phrase "Come on, you sons of bitches, do you want to live forever?"

On 26 June, a report was sent out simply stating, "Woods now U.S. Marine Corps entirely,"[5] ending one of the bloodiest and most ferocious battles U.S. forces would fight in the war.

The battle also demonstrated that US forces were motivated, boosting allies' morale, but lacked small unit and division sized training, leading to higher losses than normal.

sounds like we were a real help:mrgreen:

 

[Iriemon]

Well Germany did beat france in the franco prussian war. Also you are going by recent history. If you go back through history, Germany is one of the top fighting nations. Italy has been quite disfunctinal in the 20th century with the goverment weaking, and the rise in the mob. Its hard to fight wars when the mob is killing your judges.

Also um, didn't germany take france, on the verge of taking Britian, and it wasn't until the Americans entered, thet the allies really had a chance.

Germany wasn't formed as a modern nation until 1870. The did win the Franco Prussion war, lost WWI, and lost WWII. Their record is 1-2 in those wars just like the French.

Prior to that Prussia had a military tradition. Though the Prussians were trounced by the French in the Napoleonic wars, until they were joined by the British and Leipzig and again at Waterloo.

Germany did not take France in WWI.

Germany took France in WWII, along with Denmark Belguim Holland Poland Yugolavia Greece and the rest of the surrender monkeys. Britain was only saved because of a 17 mile strip of water.

 

[MSgt]

The French could not hold out....

With Napolean as an exception, wasn't that usually the case?

 

[Iriemon]

so we replaced the depleted french and english troops. from your wiki article:mrgreen:

Yes, on 28 March -- after the German advance had been halted. I'm not saying that American forces played no role. Just that your "4 miles from Paris and the Americans stopped 'em and saved the day" view of WWI is common among Americans but not accurate.

Battle of Belleau Wood - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

sounds like we were a real help:mrgreen:

A very impressive and courageous stand by the marines, but a tiny action in the big scheme of things. Your talking about a few divisions. The front involved well over a hundred German divisions and many score of British and French.

 

[Iriemon]

With Napolean as an exception, wasn't that usually the case?

No, they held out in WWI, losing 1.6 million men -- twice as many than US casualties in both world wars and all fronts combined.

If you look at the French victory battles I posted a couple pages ago, the French lost only one battle in 350 year between 1450-1799 -- going 29-1 -- a remarkable feat.

If the US loses no wars or battles in the next 150 years we can say we've done as well as the surrender monkeys.

 

[partier9]

Bub is right. WWII was totally different in how the Germans attacked.

The allied command expected the Germans to do the same thing in WWII as WWI. They had the Maginot line to the South, so the cream of the British and French army were sent into Berlguim to repel the expected German attack thru the low countries.

The Allied command did not think that panzers could get thru the Ardennes forest, which lie in France and Belgium between the maginot line and the plains of Belguim. They miscalculated both that and the speed of the German blietzkrieg. The Germans plowed thru the forest and their panzer divisions slashed to the coast, cutting off the best French and British divisions in Belgium. The allied command also tactically combined their tanks with infantry, which did not give them an effective mobile force to counter the panzers.

Cut off and without supplies, the allied forces fought bravely but you can't fight long without supplies in modern warfare. The French could not hold out, and the Brits fled to the coast, evacuating their men and Dunkirk leaving all their equipment behind.

::The Schlieffen Plan::

Schlieffen concluded that a massive and successful surprise attack against France would be enough to put off Britain becoming involved in a continental war. This would allow Germany time (the six weeks that Schlieffen had built into his plan) to transfer soldiers who had been fighting in the successful French campaign to Russia to take on the Russians.

Schlieffen also planned for the attack on France to go through Belgium and Luxemburg. Belgium had had her neutrality guaranteed by Britain in 1839 - so his strategy for success depended on Britain not supporting Belgium.

The Schlieffen Plan was revised as tension in Europe increased. However, the basic mechanics of it remained the same:

a devastating attack on France via Belgium as soon as Russia had announced her intention to mobilise.

a holding operation on the Russian/German border to be carried out if necessary and if required.

Germany had 6 weeks to defeat France.

Germany would then use her modernised rail system to move troops from the French operation to the Russian front.

Russia would then be attacked and defeated.

The Schlieffen Plan was daring but it had a number of glaring weaknesses:

The actions of Russia determined when Germany would have to start her attack on France even if she was ready or not.

It assumed that Russia would need six weeks to mobilise.

It assumed that Germany would defeat France in less than six weeks.

In fact, the attack in August 1914 nearly succeeded and was only defeated by the first Battle of the Marne. Poor communication between the frontline commanders and the army's headquarters in Berlin did not help Moltke's control of the campaign. Also the withdrawal of German troops in response to a higher than expected threat on the Russian front, meant that the Germans did not have the military clout that Schlieffen had built into his original plan. It was a plan that nearly succeeded but its success could only be measured by being 100% successful. France had to be defeated - and this did not happen. Schlieffen's speedy attack and expected defeat of France never occurred - it's failure did usher in the era of trench warfare that is so much linked to World War One.

Its like its happened before. Granted the end result was different both times, and the equipment was different. Buts its like 2 similar stradegies were used.
And the almost succeeded and did suceed:mrgreen:

 

[Iriemon]

This is the American version.

Every country has a different version, the UK version of WWII has us gallantly fending off the Germans all by our lonesome.

Neutral versions tend to give the Soviets the most credit for defeating the Germans, Britain was more of a nuisance and the US was a bit of a catalyst, all the hard work was done in the East.

If you go to Poland they have stories about how the only reason the UK won the Battle of Britain was because of their pilots! So they can say they won WWII in their own way :mrgreen:

The Greeks have tonnes of stories about how much grief they caused the axis powers too.

Everyone has their own little claim to WWII.

Well said, and correct.

 

[Iriemon]

Indeed the russians were a big part of defeating the germans. Also britian in the battle of britians preformed incredible. The polish were indeed very importent throught the war. Also Hitler was a big part for why his country fell. But if the US hadn't sent supplies to Russia and Britian before we entered who knows what could of happened. And if we hadn't eventully entered the war germany would of won.

Your conclusion is highly speculative and doubtful, IMO.

By the time the US forces landed in Normandy in 1944, the Germans were largely beat. They had been stopped at Moscow in late '41, their best army pulverized in Stalingrad in late '42-42, their Panzers decimated at Kursk in '43, and in '44 they were in full retreat all along the east front.

By June 44 when Normandy was invaded, the Germans had been pushed hundreds of miles out of the SU, and their forces were desparately trying to regroup on the Polish border as the Red Army prepared for the next offenses.

Did US involvement help? Of course! But as Slainte put it, it was more of a catalyst.

US aid certainly helped the Russians. But those T-34s weren't made in Detroit.

 

[Iriemon]

When the americans along with the british set foot in france they made a plan to attack the germans from two sides. West from America and the brits, and east from the russians. The combined strength ended up deafeting the germans.

A probably more accurate version, given that the Germans had been in full rout and driven out of Russia by June 1944, is that the Allied Command didn't get their assess into Europe PDQ they'd be looking at the European Comintern instead of the Reich.

With a much smaller front to defend, the Germans were able to consolidate and offer a stiffer resistance during the last few months of '44 and into '45, and the two front expedited it.

 

[Iriemon]

::The Schlieffen Plan::

Its like its happened before. Granted the end result was different both times, and the equipment was different. Buts its like 2 similar stradegies were used.
And the almost succeeded and did suceed:mrgreen:

Again, different tactics. In WWI the Germans took the Allied forces on head on in Belgium. And facing machine guns without tanks, stalled.

In WWII, the Germans cut thru the Ardennes forest, bypassed the main French and British forces, and cut them off.

 

[partier9]

Your conclusion is highly speculative and doubtful, IMO.

By the time the US forces landed in Normandy in 1944, the Germans were largely beat. They had been stopped at Moscow in late '41, their best army pulverized in Stalingrad in late '42-42, their Panzers decimated at Kursk in '43, and in '44 they were in full retreat all along the east front.

By June 44 when Normandy was invaded, the Germans had been pushed hundreds of miles out of the SU, and their forces were desparately trying to regroup on the Polish border as the Red Army prepared for the next offenses.

Did US involvement help? Of course! But as Slainte put it, it was more of a catalyst.

US aid certainly helped the Russians. But those T-34s weren't made in Detroit.

Let me put it this way. 42 we are in Africa taking on there top general. 43 taking on italy and the germans there. 44 taking on there best general again, Rommel, and liberating more troops. Now lets say we never entered. Germany doesn't need that many troops to watch over britian. It can send Rommel and all of his troops to help engage the russians. With the entire German military focused on russia, who wins? Germany, duh. While the german military is split it can't focus on a single goal. So it has to seperate its forces. Notice all those victories come when we have entered the war. Before that the Russians were losing.

 

[partier9]

Again, different tactics. In WWI the Germans took the Allied forces on head on in Belgium. And facing machine guns without tanks, stalled.

In WWII, the Germans cut thru the Ardennes forest, bypassed the main French and British forces, and cut them off.

My point wasn't the tactics, after cutting through belgium, it was france falling for it again. Germany looking at its mistake in WW1 fixed its plan to go around there main armies. While france still left itself open to attack through a area were they almost lost thier country.

 

[Iriemon]

Let me put it this way. 42 we are in Africa taking on there top general. 43 taking on italy and the germans there. 44 taking on there best general again, Rommel, and liberating more troops. Now lets say we never entered. Germany doesn't need that many troops to watch over britian. It can send Rommel and all of his troops to help engage the russians. With the entire German military focused on russia, who wins? Germany, duh. While the german military is split it can't focus on a single goal. So it has to seperate its forces. Notice all those victories come when we have entered the war. Before that the Russians were losing.

African was a tiny pittance in size compared to the Eastern front. Same with Italy. Because of the mountains terrain, the Germans were able to pin down the Allied advance with just a few divisions. Not even in the same ball park in magnitute as the Russian front.

The entire German military essentially was focused on Russia. The vaunted Atlantic Wall was largely myth. In 41 and 42 they had few divisions there because the Allies post no real threat of invasion. By Jun 44 there were maybe 25% of the forces there as Russia. Few of the divisions were first rate. In four out of the five landing zones the Allies waded ashore relatively unmolested (Omaha was the exception, where there was heavy fighting, which is one you see in all the movies).

The German forces that were there managed to slow down the allies in the hedge rows of Normandy, but once the allies broke out, they met only scattered resistance as the sped thru France, until reaching the German border.

The battle of the Bulge was the Germans putting their reserves into the West front in a last desparate gamble to repeat Spring 40 and cut off the allied forces in NE France and Belgium. It didn't work.