What Country Was most importaint to winning WWII

teknalee

Chieftain
Joined
Apr 25, 2003
Messages
54
Location
HollyWood, Fl
In your opinion what country do you think is the most importaint country to the cause of WWII.

Heres another good Topic for you guys.

1. Was it the British who won the war with help from US and USSR

2 Was it the Americans with help from Britain and USSR

3. Was it the USSR with help from US and Britian.

For example... I think that without the British holding off the German advance we would not have been able to win the war as fast or at all for that matter. The British over zealous defensive actions to hold on during the battle of britian allowed for a land base and a base of operations for the US and other allies. Of course even if the British lost it would still be a battle for the BOMB and the country that held that would have won but I really feel that the war might not have ended for another 10 years with out the British.

Please make your posts clear and well thought out.
 
I think all three played a large part, and without one the others would have failed.

Although my biased viewpoint would lead me to believe that it was in fact America that had the biggest impact. Mainly because they played a huge part not only in the Pacific, but as well as in Europe.
 
In Europe: Britian, though they would have lost without the others.
I the Pacific: America.
 
Germany. If she didn't lose, we wouldn't have won.
 
The United States was the most important; it did most of the fighting in the Pacific theater, and lots of fighting in the European. The Russians did do more fighting than the US in Europe, but they were getting lots of supplies from the US. The UK is next, for holding out against the Germans, and contributing quite a bit to the war effort on all fronts. And finally, I say Canada, Australia, & New Zealand all did a hell of a lot considering how small their populations were.
 
What a question... Russia for sure! Anybody who says something else is wrong ;). No seriously: Actualy I even think that Russia would have won the war without D-DAY (but thats an other topic!). The big part of the war was fought in Russia, most people died there and the biggest battles were fought there.
 
Britain. For quite some time they stood alone against the germans, and the world is thankful for that.
 
Of course it is Canada ;)
 
Britain for being able to hold out which still kept the war alive in western Europe if Britain had surrendered or asked for Peace then Hitler would have concentrated on attacking the USSR which could have lead to a very diffrent world
 
Every Ally did his own part, but if Britain didn't resist... (when Stalin was sleeping on Ribbentropp-Molotov pact...)
I say USA.
However it's always a "what if?...". :)

@adler17:
you're not original (always speaking about Italian errors), and quite boring.
Next time I expect you'll speak about italiani-pizza-mandolino-mafia... Compliments.
I really don't understand what's your matter with Italy. I've no problem with German.
However, following your mind (???): Lutwaffe failed his job, too, in England skies 1940.
Perhaps Italy's best job was rest out of the war (it wasn't our war, but Mussolini was wrong); the second best: try to stop NaziGerman, even risking to be invaded.
But perhaps you'd prefer NAZI German won the wwII...
 
Would Russia and Britain have been able to stay in the war without lend-lease material from the United States?
 
Suppersalmon said:
Britain for being able to hold out which still kept the war alive in western Europe if Britain had surrendered or asked for Peace then Hitler would have concentrated on attacking the USSR which could have lead to a very diffrent world

So you say if Britain made peace, the world would fall (be different)? What ould have happened if Hitler didn´t attack USSR? I know that Hitlers entire polititc was about defeating the evil communists, but just imagine, what if.

If you say: "If UK falls Hitler wins", you will have to say "If USSR falls Hitler wins even more"
 
It was a real unified effort, but I think the Soviet Union contributed a lot to crushing Nazi Germany, and even played a small part in the Pacific.

However, I heard a saying that goes along the lines of

"The war was won by British balls, American logistics, and Russian blood".
I think this is very true.
 
It was a real unified effort, but I think the Soviet Union contributed a lot to crushing Nazi Germany, and even played a small part in the Pacific.

I was under the impression that they didn't bother declaring war until the Americans were already in spitting distance of Tokyo..
 
I think it was a real unified effort. The original "Coalition of the Willing".

Hmm, two of whom had to be attacked first to be willing though :lol: ;)

I'd say that none was more important than the other. Britain gets a bit of stick, the old "you'd be speaking german" stuff, but considering what the UK did and achieved in WWII, plus it's geographically vital position, it ranks easily alongside the other countries. Plus, realistically, the resistance elements of occupied western europe and so on relied almost entirely on British support, not US support. US for it's supplies and numbers, which whilst not as many as Russia did enable the western front to exist. Russia for the wiping out of more tanks infantry and so on of the German forces than any other.

As for Adler... old habits die hard, everyone's to blame for WWII but the germans :lol:
 
Smellincoffee said:
I was under the impression that they didn't bother declaring war until the Americans were already in spitting distance of Tokyo..

Not quite. Had the Soviet Union not declared war on Japan, the Korean war would never have happened.
 
Back
Top Bottom