Jump to content
IrishTitansFan

Who do you think played the biggest role in defeating Nazi Germany?

Who do you think played the biggest role in defeating Nazi Germany?  

18 members have voted

  1. 1. What country?

    • U.S.A
    • Great Britain
      0
    • The Soviet Union
    • France (lol)
      0


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, No1TitansFan said:

The American factory worker probably had the biggest role, they helped supply both Britain and Russia and once we got into it they produced armaments at an unprecedented rate; they overcame Germany's technological advantages.


This seems to be one of the most overlooked factors. American supplies to the Allies, even before we entered the war ourselves, was vital. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russia gave up by far the most human capital, but in terms of the distinction of who played the most significant role in winning the war it is obviously the US. They fought Japan pretty much alone and then kicked in the manufacturing to overload Germany. The Brits held their ground extremely well, as did the Soviets, but if it wasn’t for the Americans fighting off Japan essentially singlehanded while having the ability to then fight wars on two separate fronts then the Axis likely win the war. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, IsntLifeFunny said:

Russia gave up by far the most human capital, but in terms of the distinction of who played the most significant role in winning the war it is obviously the US. They fought Japan pretty much alone and then kicked in the manufacturing to overload Germany. The Brits held their ground extremely well, as did the Soviets, but if it wasn’t for the Americans fighting off Japan essentially singlehanded while having the ability to then fight wars on two separate fronts then the Axis likely win the war. 


If you look at winning on both fronts there is no doubt the US was the key player in the war. There is only a debate if you limit it to Europe. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, IsntLifeFunny said:

Russia gave up by far the most human capital, but in terms of the distinction of who played the most significant role in winning the war it is obviously the US. They fought Japan pretty much alone and then kicked in the manufacturing to overload Germany. The Brits held their ground extremely well, as did the Soviets, but if it wasn’t for the Americans fighting off Japan essentially singlehanded while having the ability to then fight wars on two separate fronts then the Axis likely win the war. 

 

In reality it was 2 different wars. The premise of the original post holds. The Nazis were already well on the way to losing before America entered the war in Europe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, oldschool said:

 

In reality it was 2 different wars. The premise of the original post holds. The Nazis were already well on the way to losing before America entered the war in Europe.

I can appreciate that sentiment, but in reality it was one war fought on 2 stages. The US defeated Japan by themselves and then were the last full push to defeat Germany. 
 

The Germans were losing the war once they made the mistake to invade Russia. They definitely should have saved that for last. They opened up 2 fronts and couldn’t sustain either army. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Starkiller said:


This seems to be one of the most overlooked factors. American supplies to the Allies, even before we entered the war ourselves, was vital. 

That is easily America's biggest contribution to defeating the Nazi's IMO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Starkiller said:


This seems to be one of the most overlooked factors. American supplies to the Allies, even before we entered the war ourselves, was vital. 

They not only had to produce the armaments, they had to create the logistics, build ships and the capabilities to load and fuel them, to fronts thousands of miles away; a herculean effort at a time when a large number of the workforce were being conscripted or volunteering to go fight; it took a total unified national effort that involved sacrificing the production of many consumer goods.  Think of it, there  are no non military 1943-1945 model of any automobile just for one example. 

Edited by No1TitansFan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, No1TitansFan said:

They not only had to produce the armaments, they had to create the logistics, build ships and the capabilities to load and fuel them, to fronts thousands of miles away; a herculean effort at a time when a large number of the workforce were being conscripted or volunteering to go fight; it took a total unified national effort that involved sacrificing the production of many consumer goods.  Think of it, there  are no non military 1943-1945 model of any automobile just for one example. 

This is why the ethicist's view of how to wage war is wrong.

Wars on the scale of WWII aren't won on the battlefield.  The destruction of industrial capabilities isn't collateral damage.

The allies celebrated every time they destroyed a bearing factory for instance.  Why?  Because without bearings nothing mechanical moves.

Not truck nor train nor staff car, ship, sub, tank, artillery piece, motorcycle or airplane etc.  Without bearings and tires and fuel they're lawn ornaments.

Therefore the job of moving bullets and rifles and rations and fuel and personnel are limited to how far the soldier can walk, and what he or she can carry.

 

Did civilians die in those bearing plants? Tire plants? Steel smelters?  Yup, and they weren't collateral damage.  Those workers were every bit as important to Hitler's war plans as the soldier who carried a gun, or the pilot who flew the Stuka.

If Hitler had the ability to land a handful of V-2s in the middle Detroit we'd have been screwed.

Great generals know this, which is why Eisenhower warned us about the Military Industrial Complex before he left office.

 

 

But those in charge of the MIC will tell you that there's an "ethical" way to fight wars.  Kill the soldiers on the battlefields but leave the industrial centers and the "civilians" alone they say.  That's bullshit.  That's greed.  That's hubris in the extreme and no thinking person should fall for it.

So, is it an "ethical" consideration?  Or is it just a way to protect their assets, their money making machine, while they advocate for expending your child's life in some remote desert or shithole slum in a small town you never heard of before?

Because that's the "ethical" way to fight the next war?

Edited by TitanDuckFan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Rolltide said:

 

No. the pact was nonaggression. Stalin wanted to buy time to be prepared for a German attack. He assumed, hoped that Hitler would be tied down a long time in Western Europe with Britain and France. He expected to eventually be at war with Hitler. He knew that Hitler hated communism and blamed it on the Jews. He knew that Hitler saw Slavs as inferior. 

 

Nonaggression pact aside the Soviets were the main reason Hitler was defeated. 

Nope.

 

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov–Ribbentrop_Pact

 

The Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact was a non-aggression pact between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union that enabled those two powers to divide-up Poland between them. It was signed in Moscow on August 23, 1939, by Foreign Ministers Joachim von Ribbentrop and Vyacheslav Molotov,[1] and was officially known as the Treaty of Non-Aggression between Germany and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

 

The Pact's clauses provided a written guarantee of peace by each party towards the other and a declared commitment that neither government would ally itself to or aid an enemy of the other. In addition to the publicly-announced stipulations of non-aggression, the treaty included a secret protocol, which defined the borders of Soviet and German spheres of influence across Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Finland.

 

Soon after the pact was finalized, Germany invaded Poland on 1 September 1939. Soviet leader Joseph Stalin ordered the Soviet invasion of Poland on 17 September, one day after a Soviet–Japanese ceasefire at the Khalkhin Gol came into effect.[4] After the invasion, the new border between the two powers was confirmed by the supplementary protocol of the German–Soviet Frontier Treaty.

 

------------------------------

 

Russia fought alongside with Hitler until he invaded Russia in June 1941.

 

So why the fuck should Russia be given top credit for defeating Hitler?

 

That's like giving an arsonist credit for helping put out a fire that he originally started.

 

 

 

Edited by Denali

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russia did not fight alongside Germany, read the link you posted. They redrew lines on the map to carve out clear spheres of influence to put a buffer between them. They were clear adversaries. Hitler betrayed the non aggression pact when he invaded Ukraine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



Titans Report Footer Logo

Titans Report is a fan operated website for the Tennessee Titans. The site includes a message board, blog, podcast, organized fantasy games,and a mobile site. The podcast has had on many prominent members of the media covering the Titans. Some names include John McClain of the Houston Chronicle, Jim Wyatt of the Tennessee Titans official website, Paul Kuharsky of 104.5 The Zone, Phillip B. Wilson of the Indy Star, Jonathan Hutton of the Titans Radio Network, Sal Capaccio of the Buffalo Bills Radio Network, Scott Wright of Draft Countdown, and others.

Recent Posts

Official Website

Kuharsky's Blog

ESPN NFL Nation

104.5 The Zone

102.5 The Game

TITANSLINKS

×
×
  • Create New...