• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Most Important Allied Member of WWII

Most Important Allied Member of WWII


  • Total voters
    75
How badly would it have ended without Britain or Russia?

It wouldn't have STARTED without Britain and Russia. You think Germany planned to invade the USA in 1939??? LOL

Hitler's mistake was thinking that if he declared war on the USA the Japanese would declare war on Russia. Unlike Hitler, the Japanese were smart enough to know they already had their hands full with China, Great Britain and the USA. They never declared war on Russia, and Stalin only did when the war in the West was won so he could claim some spoils in the East.

I believe that if Hitler had not declared war, the USA would have focused only on Japan and left Europe alone. Be glad he was that stupid.
 
The most important US allied member of WWII was God...

I received this in an email. I know believers can relate to this message.

From "Reflections on Pearl Harbor "
by Admiral Chester Nimitz.

Sunday, December 7th, 1941--Admiral Chester Nimitz was attending a
concert in Washington D.C.
He was paged and told there was a phone call for him.
When he answered the phone,
it was President Franklin Delano Roosevelt
on the phone. He told Admiral Nimitz that he
(Nimitz) would now be the Commander
of the Pacific Fleet.

Admiral Nimitz flew to Hawaii to assume command of the Pacific Fleet.
He landed at Pearl Harbor on Christmas Eve, 1941.
There was such a spirit of despair, dejection and defeat
--you would have thought the Japanese had already won the war.
On Christmas Day, 1941, Adm. Nimitz was given a boat tour of the
destruction wrought on Pearl Harbor by the Japanese.
Big sunken battleships and navy vessels cluttered the waters
every where you looked.

As the tour boat returned to dock,
the young helmsman of the boat asked,
"Well Admiral, what do you
think after seeing all this destruction?"
Admiral Nimitz's reply shocked
everyone within the sound of his voice.

Admiral Nimitz said, "The Japanese made three of the biggest mistakes
an attack force could ever make, or God was taking care of America .
Which do you think it was?"

Shocked and surprised, the young helmsman asked,
"What do mean by saying the Japanese made the three biggest
mistakes an attack
force ever made?" Nimitz explained:

Mistake number one :
the Japanese attacked on Sunday morning.
Nine out of every ten crewmen of those ships were ashore on leave.
If those same ships had been lured to sea
and been sunk--we would have lost
38,000 men instead of 3,800.

Mistake number two :
when the Japanese saw all those battleships lined in a row,
they got so carried away sinking those battleships,
they never once bombed our dry docks opposite those ships.
If they had destroyed our
dry docks, we would have had to tow every one of those
ships to America to be repaired.
As it is now, the ships are in shallow water and can be raised.
One tug can pull them over to the dry docks,
and we can have them repaired and at sea by the time
we could have towed them to America .
I already have crews ashore anxious to man those ships.

Mistake number three:
Every drop of fuel in the Pacific theater of war is in top of the
ground storage tanks five miles away over that hill.
One attack plane could have strafed those
tanks and destroyed our fuel supply.

That's why the Japanese made three of the biggest
mistakes an attack force could make
or, God was taking care of America .
 
Revisionist history is in people giving them more credit, and sometimes all the credit, just as you basically did.

Also, this is the most important Allied member of WORLD WAR II... not just of the European battlefield.

He's not wrong that the USSR bled the Axis white. Remember that the USSR destroyed more Axis divisions then everyone else combined. They paid dearly for it, but if those divisions were instead fighting in Italy, Africa or Western Europe, the war would have gone very different. What likely cost Hitler the war was attacking the USSR, and especially getting bogged down during winter. If the US had to pour more resources into Europe to deal with the divisions otherwise destroyed by the USSR, the Pacific and Africa theaters would have been also quite different. In many ways, the Allies owe the millions of Russians who died wearing down the Nazis a debt of gratitude. I agree with zstep18 that the allies probably couldn't have won the war without the USSR. The damage inflicted to the Nazi was immense. But at the same time, the USSR needed US war material to do just that.
 
It wouldn't have STARTED without Britain and Russia. You think Germany planned to invade the USA in 1939??? LOL

Hitler's mistake was thinking that if he declared war on the USA the Japanese would declare war on Russia. Unlike Hitler, the Japanese were smart enough to know they already had their hands full with China, Great Britain and the USA. They never declared war on Russia, and Stalin only did when the war in the West was won so he could claim some spoils in the East.

I believe that if Hitler had not declared war, the USA would have focused only on Japan and left Europe alone. Be glad he was that stupid.

Um what? The war would have started if the UK didn't declare war on them and let them have Eastern Europe. World War 2 didn't start with Britain and Russia declaring war on Germany. Japan had already been at war with China for many years and Hitler wanted to be BFFs with the UK.

I'm thankful that hitler made that mistake, and also the mistake of declaring war on Russia, and also the UK being the ones to actually declare war on Germany.

So how exactly does it go without Russia and the UK?
 
what no French option? ;) Has to be said though wtf are China doing on this poll?
 
How badly would it have ended without Britain or Russia?

That was the original comment you made that I opted to respond to.

Um what? The war would have started if the UK didn't declare war on them and let them have Eastern Europe. World War 2 didn't start with Britain and Russia declaring war on Germany. Japan had already been at war with China for many years and Hitler wanted to be BFFs with the UK.

I'm thankful that hitler made that mistake, and also the mistake of declaring war on Russia, and also the UK being the ones to actually declare war on Germany.

So how exactly does it go without Russia and the UK?

WWII started with Britain and France declaring war on Germany after Germany refused to stop the invasion of Poland. Russia got involved when Germany invaded in 1941. Then in December of 1941, a couple of days after Pearl Harbor, the Nazi idiot declared war on the USA.

You were making a comment in opposition to the USA being the "most important ally." I was stating that the USA would not have been involved in a war in Europe at all, without a war already happening between the European Axis powers and the British and Russians.

Had Hitler not declared war on the USA he would only have been facing the UK and Russia, and at the time the Germans were doing a fairly decent job of kicking both their asses.

By declaring war on the USA he sealed his doom.
 
Last edited:
The Eastern Front was huge. The Battle of Stalingrad was the turning point in the war with Hitler. In purely military terms, the USSR would have beat Germany alone. The contribution of the USSR was huge just in the fact that Hitler decided to declare war on the USSR. If Hitler did not declare war on the USSR and if the USSR did not fight alongside the Allies, war in Europe would have been much, much more difficult for the United States. The USSR depleted Germany's resources and manpower. I don't think the Allies could have won without the USSR.

I didn't realize it was 'revisionist' history to say that the USSR had a huge part in the Allies victory in World War 2.

The Germans were woefully unprepared for the Russian Winter, which caused more casualties that first year than combat with Russian troops did. Since we are in "what-if" land, had Hitler stopped *****-footing around with Britain (like not completing the attack on the BEF at Dunkirk, and failing to pursue an invasion of England) and thereby defeated the UK in 1941, he could have invaded Russia in 1942 and kicked Stalin's butt.

Declaring war on the USA in 1941? Insanity that cost Germany the war.
 
That was the original comment you made that I opted to respond to.



WWII started with Britain and France declaring war on Germany after Germany refused to stop the invasion of Poland. Russia got involved when Germany invaded in 1941. Then in December of 1941, a couple of days after Pearl Harbor, the Nazi idiot declared war on the USA.

You were making a comment in opposition to the USA being the "most important ally." I was stating that the USA would not have been involved in a war in Europe at all, without a war already happening between the European Axis powers and the British and Russians.

Had Hitler not declared war on the USA he would only have been facing the UK and Russia, and at the time the Germans were doing a fairly decent job of kicking both their asses.

By declaring war on the USA he sealed his doom.

No, the war started with Germany invading Poland. The UK didn't have to declare war on Germany. In fact if they didn't, Germany would have free reign over Eastern Europe and the Jewry, Slavs and Roma therein. Hitler may still be a doddery Chancellor of Germany. So his fate was sealed when the Brits declared war on Germany. All the other options in the poll waited for declarations of war made against them.
 
Russia, no question. They get none of the fanfare of the US, though they're almost exclusively responsible for turning the tide. They kicked Hitler back the **** across the border and trashed the mighty German war juggernaut almost single-handedly.
 
No, the war started with Germany invading Poland. The UK didn't have to declare war on Germany. In fact if they didn't, Germany would have free reign over Eastern Europe and the Jewry, Slavs and Roma therein. Hitler may still be a doddery Chancellor of Germany. So his fate was sealed when the Brits declared war on Germany. All the other options in the poll waited for declarations of war made against them.

Sorry, not quite correct:

Britain Declares War On Germany, 1939

There was a mutual assistance agreement between Britain and Poland in the event either was attacked, but it still required a declaration of war which both France and the UK did on September 3, 1939, two days after Germany invaded Poland on September 1, 1939.

Hitler believed they would back down and not go to war over Poland. He did not want war with either, at least not then.
 
Sorry, not quite correct:

Britain Declares War On Germany, 1939

There was a mutual assistance agreement between Britain and Poland in the event either was attacked, but it still required a declaration of war which both France and the UK did on September 3, 1939, two days after Germany invaded Poland on September 1, 1939.

Hitler believed they would back down and not go to war over Poland. He did not want war with either, at least not then.
Czechoslovakia had similar assurances, and were sold out at the conference table. A treaty goes only as far as the countries are willing to honor it. Yes, they honored it, but only because the inevitable truth had at that point become undeniable.
 
I voted USSR as "most important" because they carried the lion's share of the load as far as military casualties go, especially with respect to the population size. They also had an important role in both the European and Pacific theaters of the war. Even after two bombs were dropped on Japan, the Japanese were considering not surrendering unconditionally until the Soviets jumped in.

But the idea of "most important" is a little absurd. All parties listed were needed. If there's any one thing that could make me pick one, it's simply the amount of people lost during fighting.
 
If it were which country would have the best shot at defeating Germany one on one, I'd say the U.S.. We simply had the will, character, and resources like no one else.
 
If it were which country would have the best shot at defeating Germany one on one, I'd say the U.S.. We simply had the will, character, and resources like no one else.
The will and character to sit out the first two years.
 
He's not wrong that the USSR bled the Axis white. Remember that the USSR destroyed more Axis divisions then everyone else combined. They paid dearly for it, but if those divisions were instead fighting in Italy, Africa or Western Europe, the war would have gone very different. What likely cost Hitler the war was attacking the USSR, and especially getting bogged down during winter. If the US had to pour more resources into Europe to deal with the divisions otherwise destroyed by the USSR, the Pacific and Africa theaters would have been also quite different. In many ways, the Allies owe the millions of Russians who died wearing down the Nazis a debt of gratitude. I agree with zstep18 that the allies probably couldn't have won the war without the USSR. The damage inflicted to the Nazi was immense. But at the same time, the USSR needed US war material to do just that.

And that goes both ways... if Hitler wasn't dealing with Allied shipping, the British in North Africa then Italy and the Balkans or the divisions tied up waiting for the impending invasion then those could have been used against the USSR and if Germany had attacked just a month or two earlier the USSR would have been knocked out of the war that year. While the Allies PROBABLY could not have won the war without the USSR the Allies WOULD NOT have won the war with out the USA.
 
And that goes both ways... if Hitler wasn't dealing with Allied shipping, the British in North Africa then Italy and the Balkans or the divisions tied up waiting for the impending invasion then those could have been used against the USSR

Would it have mattered? The Nazis threw huge numbers of men and material against the Soviets, and they still lost. The USSR showed complete willingness to take ridiculous causalities to stop the Nazi. Plus, more troops cannot fight General Winter. There is no question in my mind that the sheer number of troops the Axis lost in the Soviet Theater was absolutely key to the war. Russians spilled more Axis blood then everyone else combined. Also remember that many of the soldiers in West Europe were badly trained conscripts. I doubt they would have made a difference being thrown against the Russians.

and if Germany had attacked just a month or two earlier the USSR would have been knocked out of the war that year.[/qiuote]

Possibly. Hitler made a bad timing error there. Praise Comrade General Winter!

While the Allies PROBABLY could not have won the war without the USSR the Allies WOULD NOT have won the war with out the USA.

It's more complicated than that. Could we have won the war without Battleship England? I doubt it. We needed the USSR and the UK and they needed us.
 
Czechoslovakia had similar assurances, and were sold out at the conference table. A treaty goes only as far as the countries are willing to honor it. Yes, they honored it, but only because the inevitable truth had at that point become undeniable.

Unfortunately they honored it with a "phoney war." If they had simply attacked right away while the German Army was committed to Poland, instead of preparing for a WWI scenario and waiting to be attacked...the Germans would have been screwed.
 
It was a tough one for awhile there England was holding down the fort almost exclusively but in the end I had to go with the Russians due to the fact that the Eastern Front and the Russian victory was really what ended the war.
 
Unfortunately they honored it with a "phoney war." If they had simply attacked right away while the German Army was committed to Poland, instead of preparing for a WWI scenario and waiting to be attacked...the Germans would have been screwed.

Absolutely... the French had the biggest army in Europe at the beginning. Along with Britain they would have kicked the German's asses.
 
There is no way that the war would have been won without any of the three.
A peace accords could have been signed, but the defeat of the Third Reich? I don't think so.

If England would have fallen, I don't think the US would not have had a land base to work out of and thus the industrial machine would not have mattered.
We could have stopped them from expanding out of the EurAsian landmass... but maybe not even then. Africa would have been in doubt then too.

But, Hitler's biggest blunder was Barbarossa. The Soviets get my vote.
 
Back
Top Bottom