WW2

[Nielsen_Noetic]

Sorry if this has been done; I was just talking about this with a friend yesterday, he believes we would have won.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

It's a good question; I think it is obviously very speculative, but the answer for me is a big NO. 

 

[T.I.M.]

Well, I'd suggest the question needs a bit more definition.

Does American help just mean actual military intervention, or does it include all aid, including lend/lease and other military supplies?

Also how does Japan (I imagine that the intent of this was to focus on Germany) factor into the question?


To summarize, my personal feeling is that without any help at all, including American material aid, the Germans would have been able to achieve a favourable stalemate with regards to Britain and Russia.  Though not outright total conquest it would have meant large swathes of the Soviet Union permanently in the Reich's hands, and German hegemony over the European continent.

Without military intervention, but with continued American material aid, I think the Allies would probably still have won, though Britain would have become an insignificant factor by war's end and the conflict would have been decided by the Soviet Union, which would subsequently have become the dominant power over all of Europe, though at a higher cost in lives and subsequently resulting in a much longer war recovery process.

 

[Nielsen_Noetic]

I agree T.I.M it does depend on a lot of thing's, I also agree that the U.S.S.R would have eventually prevailed over Germany. I was posing the question with the premise that material support would have continued.
You must all keep in mind as well though that Canada had quite few troops being held back in Canada as well as nearly a million troops in Britain doing nothing but training for a little over two years. Not to mention the large amount of supplies coming out of Canada.
Oh and presume the U.S. did go to war with Japan.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

I agree T.I.M it does depend on a lot of thing's, I also agree that the U.S.S.R would have eventually prevailed over Germany. I was posing the question with the premise that material support would have continued.
You must all keep in mind as well though that Canada had quite few troops being held back in Canada as well as nearly a million troops in Britain doing nothing but training for a little over two years. Not to mention the large amount of supplies coming out of Canada.
Oh and presume the U.S. did go to war with Japan.

Canada at no time had a million troops in the entire world, much less in Great Britain.  We had 1,000,000 men and women in all three services, over the course of the entire war.  Peak strength in Britain was probably less than 500,000, but I'd have to check to be sure.  I think 350,000 might be closer to the mark.

Canada didn't have all that many troops being "held back" in Canada - there were the Zombies, but they were eventually employed in the Aleutians, and in early 1945 a few thousand of them arrived in NW Europe, though their arrival came after the need for conscripts had largely abated (three months of rest after the Scheldt, plus many remusters, helped salvage the problem).

 

[Nielsen_Noetic]

I regress; your right regarding the statistics in Great Britain and those regarding our active troop strength during the war I must have meant a million troops in the entire forces. I will however back my statement that we had many troops being held back in Canada. For numerous reasons not least of which being we were holding basically every German prisoner coming out of the western theater.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

I regress; your right regarding the statistics in Great Britain and those regarding our active troop strength during the war I must have meant a million troops in the entire forces. I will however back my statement that we had many troops being held back in Canada. For numerous reasons not least of which being we were holding basically every German prisoner coming out of the western theater.

I was under the impression the Veteran's Guard of Canada guarded German prisoners of war.   Are you familiar with them?  Perhaps you can explain to me how WW I vets in excess of 40 and 50 years of age could have been better employed in a theatre of war?

I was further under the impression sizeable numbers of Germans and Italians were held in camps in the UK and in the United States of America.

 

[Nielsen_Noetic]

When the United States joined the war yes but until then no, many of the men from the African corps were kept in England Scotland and wales. The majority however of POW's came to Canada, and yes I am familiar with them. Your assuption however that because these men were used as gaurds all gaurds were from the veterans gaurd is inapt. In fact they had a lot of trouble with the German soldiers being abused by the younger men gaurding them.

 

[big bad john]

Please use the spell check, it makes it easier for all of us.

 

[Jonny Boy]

i think the allies would of won the war but it would of taken years and years longer.

i know the American went through some intense fighting and had many casualties ( band of brothers for example) but the allies could of done it.  although i am very happy the Americans did join  in because they assisted the allies in such a large way that it ended the war so much faster.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

i think the allies would of won the war but it would of taken years and years longer.

i know the American went through some intense fighting and had many casualties ( band of brothers for example) but the allies could of done it.   although i am very happy the Americans did join   in because they assisted the allies in such a large way that it ended the war so much faster.

Every single tank in every single Canadian Armoured Regiment in combat after August 1942 was built where?

Hint - it is not the Montreal Locomotive works.

Same goes for the majority of British Armoured Regiments in Italy and NW Europe.

Just for a couple of examples.

 

[putz]

I voted yes but can I go back and change it to no....  I do believe that the Germans were only a year or so away from creating an Atomic Weapon by the end of the war.  IF the US had not joined the conflict I believe that the Russians would have run over right to the boarder of France.  However, if the Germans were not fighting the Americans on the West maybe they could have used the extra forces in the east.....  I think one could go crazy going over the buts and what ifs.

 

[Nielsen_Noetic]

Yes the possibilities are truly gawk worthy in there magnitude, though I still hold to the idea that Russia would have eventually won the war. Also; yes the United States did make most of our armour due to the fact they were at war with Germany as well, but even if they weren't and were at war with Japan. I could not see them refusing to build our armour for our fight as well. Everyones always looking to make a buck especially those in a squeeze.

 

[pbi]

though I still hold to the idea that Russia would have eventually won the war

I would suggest that we should be very careful not to underestimate the massive Lend Lease contributions by the US and British Empire to the USSR: the provision of thousands of trucks, halftracks, tanks, radios, food items, boots, etc allowed the Soviets to focus much of their industrial effort on AFVs, artillery and aircraft.

Cheers

 

[Brad Sallows]

Not a prayer.  At the highest level, WW II was a war of attrition.

One thing to add to consideration of the East Front is the flexibility the Soviets gained to redeploy their far eastern forces once it was clear Japan was going to be heavily engaged against the US.

 

[Infanteer]

Winston Churchill, upon hearing that the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbour, was said to have exclaimed "So we did win the war, after all!" - I believe he was right.

 

[Jonny Boy]

i think the allies would of won the war but it would of taken years and years longer.

i know the American went through some intense fighting and had many casualties ( band of brothers for example) but the allies could of done it.  although i am very happy the Americans did join  in because they assisted the allies in such a large way that it ended the war so much faster.

OK after really thinking hard about this and talking to a few people (i.e my grandpa ex RCAF during 2nd world war) i would like to change my answer to no.  my grandpa told me that the Americans had 3 soldiers for every 1 British/ Canadian soldier.

they did offer a large number in the fight against the German army. although i do believe and it is in a book i have seen that the British (Montgomery) and the Canadians were the brains of the war and the Americans just had the man power to get the job done.  unfortunately patton and Eisenhower took all the credit and glory. 

for an example of how the British and Canadians were better and smarter is operation overlord A.K.A D-Day. the British and Canadian troops used armored vehicles and tanks to storm the beaches and have less casualties. however on the American side they just used man power and were nearly pushed back into the water by the germans. i believe in the book it said that the Americans had only advanced a measly 100 yard 2 days after landing on the beach. And on saving private Ryan it made it look so easy ha

 

[Docherty]

Germany had a stronger sence of nationalism as well they wanted the retain the goals of the "German Ambition" which took almost 20 years to achieve.  German was also ahead of us in Nuclear Engineering but we some how made the "bomb" before them 

 

[Long in the tooth]

The military potential released by the US during the WW 2 was truly awesome.  Most of the hydro electric projects built in the Pacific Northwest were used to light Seattle, power metal smelters and run the huge Boeing plant.  The Columbia (Grand Coulee Dam) and snake rivers were harnessed and the power was used for the most part for military ends.  I mention this as in modern day industrial societies power (and the price of it) is the main determinate of output.  As the only (major) combatant with industrial infrastructure undamaged and with a true mass production philosophy, the US was the major producer of naval and heavy air assets.

Without the US there is no Torch, Husky, Anzio or D Day.  The bombing campain would never have gotten off the ground.

 

[Jonny Boy]

OK but the whole planing and organizing of d-day was done by Montgomery. all he needed was the bodies to do it. and after the invasion was complete whole got all the credit and who still gets all the credit?

thats right the Americans