It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Lets settle this! Would the UK have survived WW2 without the USA.

page: 2
18
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 11:33 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok


I read the OP, maybe you should read a history book. By the time the US chose to open a 2nd front, Hitler had already almost lost his capitol. Not exactly heroic to wait till all the soldiers are 12 year old boys.




posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 11:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: crazyewok

So you don't think that Germany wouldn't have been able to adapt to this?


Well they didn't.

Not sure what they could have done?

There air force was beaten and there their Navy in no way capable of taking on the Royal Navy anymore than the British navy today could take on the US Navy.

They could have tried to out build the UK in ships but the UK was so vastly ahead. It would only have been possible if they could have secured the resources in Africa and Russia to fuel there industry.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 11:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: crazyewok

You have forgotten the one who really defeated Hitler: Stalin.


Without the US Lend Lease program, Stalin wouldn't have been able to get his forces out of Russia to help out.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 11:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: crazyewok

Well my furry little friend, you can thank Pearl Harbor for allowing the US government to get all the German scientists and technology necessary to screw the planet. Saving youze pommies was probably not high on the "to do" list.

Anyway, I'm pretty sure that it was Australia that saved you both.



Ah yeah, we screwed the planet. Stalin didn't get his own scientists and technology, I had forgotten.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 11:36 AM
link   
a reply to: Wardaddy454

Roosevelt was a wise man. Won't argue that.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 11:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: crazyewok

You have forgotten the one who really defeated Hitler: Stalin.


Without the US Lend Lease program, Stalin wouldn't have been able to get his forces out of Russia to help out.


Overly focusing on the lend lease program is typical in the West, despite the minor impact it had on the Eastern Front.

The Soviets did not help out in Europe. They won the war in that theatre. By the time of the Allied landing on D-Day, the Wehrmacht was for all intents and purposes defeated. It had been since Kursk and arguably Stalingrad. The Nazi leadership was merely delaying the inevitable.

The Western Allies main contributions against Germany were in the Africa campaign and the Mediterranean (Italy).



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 11:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
But was Britain really "on their own" ?


The Lend-Lease policy, formally titled "An Act to Promote the Defense of the United States", (Pub.L. 77–11, H.R. 1776, 55 Stat. 31, enacted March 11, 1941)[1] was a program under which the United States supplied Free France, the United Kingdom, the Republic of China, and later the USSR and other Allied nations with food, oil, and materiel between 1941 and August 1945. This included warships and warplanes, along with other weaponry. It was signed into law on March 11, 1941 and ended in September 1945. In general the aid was free, although some hardware (such as ships) were returned after the war. In return, the U.S. was given leases on army and naval bases in Allied territory during the war.

Lend-Lease




That was not exactly help or charity.

Just trade. A business transactions.


That's like me saying the USA today owes its current existence to Saudi Arabia and China as you economy is based around there oil and industrial production.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 11:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: crazyewok

So you don't think that Germany wouldn't have been able to adapt to this?


Well they didn't.

Not sure what they could have done?

There air force was beaten and there their Navy in no way capable of taking on the Royal Navy anymore than the British navy today could take on the US Navy.


You know. If you guys were sitting so pretty, why were you guys turtling in your island up until America entered the war? You make it sound like the British had everything under control and I don't think that is the case.

I don't necessarily think that y'all were saved by any one country, but you cannot deny that the heat was on and America's entry certainly took a lot of that heat off of you guys. Though, even with America in the war, Germany was still winning on almost all fronts for a good while (up until D-Day).


They could have tried to out build the UK in ships but the UK was so vastly ahead. It would only have been possible if they could have secured the resources in Africa and Russia to fuel there industry.


Which they were working on doing (and were denied by the Americans).



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 11:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: crazyewok

You have forgotten the one who really defeated Hitler: Stalin.


Without the US Lend Lease program, Stalin wouldn't have been able to get his forces out of Russia to help out.


Lend lease was only really significant to the soviet war effort early in the war when the majority came from the UK (due to you guys being late, again).



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 11:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: crazyewok

You have forgotten the one who really defeated Hitler: Stalin.


Here's an interesting read:

www.historynet.com...

Britain actually carried USSR for a while.




Lend-Lease aid did not “save” the Soviet Union from defeat during the Battle of Moscow. But the speed at which Britain in particular was willing and able to provide aid to the Soviet Union, and at which the Soviet Union was able to put foreign equipment into frontline use, is still an underappreciated part of this story. During the bitter fighting of the winter of 1941–1942, British aid made a crucial difference


Stalin didn't win the war. It was a joint effort.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 11:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Khaleesi

Stalin defeated Germany. Italy and Japan were defeated by the Allies.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Pretty sure any ww2 vet from any country would be rolling in their graves if they heard the boasting that one side contributed more than the other or that one side could do it on their own or saved another. Thank God we don't have to endure what any of those men went through, because from all the dick swinging nowadays from every nation I doubt we could organise a piss up in a brewery let alone conduct operations to defeat an army.
edit on 412016412016bam30 by sosobad because: autocorrect
edit on 322016322016bpm30 by sosobad because: (no reason given)
extra DIV



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 11:42 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

Russia helped a lot too.
And as for USA helping UK. The UK only finished paying for US services in WW2 in 2007.
So, it wasn't a goodwill gesture. It was paid for.
BBC NEWS | UK | UK settles WWII debts to allies
edit on 30-3-2016 by blackcrowe because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 11:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Ohanka

You obviously didn't read the article. It's a long article. Read it in full before you reply next time.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 11:42 AM
link   
The concept of a German Invasion of the UK is completely laughable. A completely unfeasible scenario that was impossible.

Would Britain have been forced to come to a negotiated peace? Yes.

Would Britain have fallen to Nazi rule? No.

Therefore, Britain would have survived without the Americans, but it would not have won the war.
edit on -050011am3kam by Ohanka because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 11:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Khaleesi

Okay and Britain was lucky to have Churchill. Point remains: USSR soldiers and civilians were the ones who died to save all of us from a horrible regime.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 11:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: crazyewok

So you don't think that Germany wouldn't have been able to adapt to this?


Well they didn't.

Not sure what they could have done?

There air force was beaten and there their Navy in no way capable of taking on the Royal Navy anymore than the British navy today could take on the US Navy.


You know. If you guys were sitting so pretty, why were you guys turtling in your island up until America entered the war? You make it sound like the British had everything under control and I don't think that is the case.

I don't necessarily think that y'all were saved by any one country, but you cannot deny that the heat was on and America's entry certainly took a lot of that heat off of you guys. Though, even with America in the war, Germany was still winning on almost all fronts for a good while (up until D-Day).


They could have tried to out build the UK in ships but the UK was so vastly ahead. It would only have been possible if they could have secured the resources in Africa and Russia to fuel there industry.


Which they were working on doing (and were denied by the Americans).


Stalingrad 1942.
El Alamein 1942
Kursk 1943

Germany was already getting its arse handed to it by D-Day.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 11:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ohanka

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: crazyewok

You have forgotten the one who really defeated Hitler: Stalin.


Without the US Lend Lease program, Stalin wouldn't have been able to get his forces out of Russia to help out.


Overly focusing on the lend lease program is typical in the West, despite the minor impact it had on the Eastern Front.

The Soviets did not help out in Europe. They won the war in that theatre. By the time of the Allied landing on D-Day, the Wehrmacht was for all intents and purposes defeated. It had been since Kursk and arguably Stalingrad. The Nazi leadership was merely delaying the inevitable.

The Western Allies main contributions against Germany were in the Africa campaign and the Mediterranean (Italy).


It was far more vital than you give it credit for. It would have been impossible for the Red Army to move the masses of troops and supplies on the primitive roads to the front lines without the Studebaker trucks, which also served as the launching pads for their rocket artillery. That's on top of the food and other supplies it provided the Soviets.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 11:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Peeple

If you are counting lives lost, then yes USSR lost the most lives. The article shows that access to declassified material in the post USSR era show how important British supplies really were.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 11:46 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

Settle this?
Unless you have the capability to go back in time and deliberately control events to create a new scenario, there is no why in hell this could ever be "settled".

There are a billion and one possible scenarios.
This is foolish.



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join