Thread: How large was America's role in WW1 and WW2?

yep, 5

Its certainly interesting to hear a different perspective.

Thus far we've heard how Allies (except Britain) shot POW's (apparently Nazis didn't?), how the USA is to blame for not invading D-Day further east to prevent soviet control, how German soldiers were merely patriots and not at all aligned with Nazi goals, invading Poland was justified, and how one should fight for their country "right or wrong".

Now I'm possibly being a bit unfair by lumping all of that together out of complete context, but the message is clear. I don't think Thor recognizes that Germany was wrong and did a horrible thing by allowing and supporting Hitler in what he did. Or somehow he's rationalizing that what the German military did was right in spite of the fact that they were supporting Hitler who was wrong. The total logic kind of escapes me.

Furthermore, he's ignoring the very generous rebuilding efforts of the Allies (at least Britain and the US) after the war for West Germany and even the monumental efforts to keep Berlin free.

What other conquerer goes that far out of their way to rebuild the country they just smoked? Granted, it was self-serving because we saw what happened when we DIDN'T do that after WWI. But nevertheless we could have just implemented martial law for the next 50 years as the Soviet Union did.

Furthermore, the USA certainly COULD have conquered the world soon thereafter being the world's only country with Nukes. But we didn't.

Originally Posted by ThorHammer

Let me make something perfectly clear here: I am NOT trying to downplay America's involvement in WW2 (or WW1 for that matter). Indeed, our involvement was very important, vital even. However, American involvement in both wars did not enable victory for the allies. The question of victory or defeat was still very much up in the air prior to American involvement (some historians would say leaning towards victory). American involvement guaranteed victory. In that sense our allies should thank us. We turned the war from a long, bloody affair to a much shorter but still very bloody one.

America, however, was not some sort of vengeful god coming from on high to smite the evil Germans (and japs). We were not some sort of unstoppable machine. We suffered our defeats just like everyone else. The Germans (and Japs) gave us hell and fought tooth and nail for their Fatherlands. Our soldiers were not some sort of superhuman men walking on earth; they were simply men just like the men they were fighting. To build them up into something they, and our contribution to the war, were not takes away from their sacrifice and the sacrifice of their opponents.

Very well said. I agree.

I'm thankful for all the people fighting to end this horrible war. I'm thankful for the people in occupied countries who did their best working from the underground (like Poland, France and all the others) and for the soldiers from various countries like the UK, Canada, Russia, Australia, New Zealand, the US and every other country that sent people to end things.

Originally Posted by ThorHammer

.... Our soldiers were not some sort of superhuman men walking on earth; they were simply men just like the men they were fighting. To build them up into something they, and our contribution to the war, were not takes away from their sacrifice and the sacrifice of their opponents.

I do not see any posts anywhere that claim they were superhuman, or anything like it.

Please point out where that is mentioned, as you seem to be opposing that claim.

That is certainly not what I am saying, and it is certainly not the basis for my strong opposition to your general views on these issues.

Originally Posted by Disillusioned_1

Now I'm possibly being a bit unfair by lumping all of that together out of complete context, but the message is clear.

It is quite unfair because it paints an inaccruate picture of what has been discussed thus far.

Originally Posted by Disillusioned_1

I don't think Thor recognizes that Germany was wrong and did a horrible thing by allowing and supporting Hitler in what he did. Or somehow he's rationalizing that what the German military did was right in spite of the fact that they were supporting Hitler who was wrong. The total logic kind of escapes me.

I am certainly not saying Germany (its government and, to a certain extent, its people) wasn't in the wrong during WW2. However, you seem to be requireing that they look forward in time to see the end result. You are judging with the benefit of hindsight.

As for the German army, I do think they were right for fighting for their country. The honor demanded it, and I respect them as soldiers and patriots for their Fatherland.

Originally Posted by Disillusioned_1

Furthermore, he's ignoring the very generous rebuilding efforts of the Allies (at least Britain and the US) after the war for West Germany and even the monumental efforts to keep Berlin free.

I am not ignoring that. It is simply not the subject of this thread.

Originally Posted by Disillusioned_1

What other conquerer goes that far out of their way to rebuild the country they just smoked? Granted, it was self-serving because we saw what happened when we DIDN'T do that after WWI. But nevertheless we could have just implemented martial law for the next 50 years as the Soviet Union did.

Again, that is not the subject of this thread.

Originally Posted by ThorHammer

Not at all. Though, in both cases, Germany was not trying to take over the world and nor was it the US that did the only heavy lifting. Trying to make your point using bogus history isn't helping.

There is no question that the Axis had their sites on global domination. Had Hitler won in Europe, plans to attack America were in the woodwork.

Originally Posted by ViPER

There is no question that the Axis had their sites on global domination. Had Hitler won in Europe, plans to attack America were in the woodwork.

Source?

Originally Posted by ThorHammer

The strategic reality of Germany's position made such a plan impossible. Germany couldn't afford to sit back and wait for the Russians and French to come at them. They didn't have the numbers to pull off such a fight. That is why German planners decided one side had to be knocked out of the war quickly in order to concentrate on the other. Since France could get into the field quicker than the Russians, the blow had to come there.



A German army incapable of landing a decisive blow against Great Britain.



No doubt. However, from a British standpoint, their territory would remain intact. Morally, well, that is a totally different argument.



Wacht am Rhein was never supposed to push into France, though. Indeed, that was never its objective at all. They had totally seperate objectives and scopes of operations.

and if they happen to take some territory from france and ease some of their problems... well.... bully

only incapable because the brits can fight and stand. which isn't generally possible without bullets and food.

the callous murder and enslavement of well over a million people is one of those moral questions i generally take a stand on. kinda a rule of thumb.

Originally Posted by ThorHammer

You said arm, hence my confusion. The Heer, Luftwaffe, and Kriegsmarine did not wear them on their arms. Eitherway, wearing of national insignia hardly denotes political alligence.

it does when you belong to a single party, facist dictatorship. just like i'd call the soviets communist.

Originally Posted by bubble gun

Right. Circa 1925.


So you're not interested in what the man himself had to say on this subject?
I see.

what the man himself had to say in the propaganda he fed a nation so he could rise to power, perform a coup, seize power, and embark on a war of conquest?

No not particularly. Why should I?

Originally Posted by reality

the callous murder and enslavement of well over a million people is one of those moral questions i generally take a stand on. kinda a rule of thumb.

Same here. Such a peace would not have sat well with me either.

Originally Posted by reality

it does when you belong to a single party, facist dictatorship. just like i'd call the soviets communist.

What makes you think they belonged to the party though? Party membership was not compulsory.

Originally Posted by ThorHammer

It is quite unfair because it paints an inaccruate picture of what has been discussed thus far.



I am certainly not saying Germany (its government and, to a certain extent, its people) was in the wrong during WW2. However, you seem to be requireing that they look forward in time to see the end result. You are judging with the benefit of hindsight.

As for the German army, I do think they were right for fighting for their country. The honor demanded it, and I respect them as soldiers and patriots for their Fatherland.



I am not ignoring that. It is simply not the subject of this thread.



Again, that is not the subject of this thread.

ok thor, i think i'm just gonna bow outta this one. if you can't get on board the nazi's were wrong train then i think i'm just gonna hop off. cause damn dude, thats some shit.