Why do Europeans like to dimish the significant role America played in both world wars...

Why do Europeans like to dimish the significant role America played in both world wars? Like it or not we served as tide turners in both. I understand that countries like France, Russia, and Great Britain suffered a lot more than us obviously, and that's honorable but it doesn't mean we didn't help at all just because millions of Americans didn't die in Europe.

Attached: v-day-in-germany-3134873-5b7636b2c9e77c0057a127ec.jpg (768x571, 66K)

We were clapping both France and Britain in WW1 before you arrived. I dont understand why you would ally with them in the first place when they are both inferior to us

When Russians talk about how they won WW2 I mention how America did everything, when Americans talk about how they won WW2 I mention how Russia did everything

lol, based

Based

Americans did nothing other than die needlessly in WW1

You sunk a civilian ship and tried to get Mexico to invade us, don't act innocent you slimy kraut.

We won singlehandedly

>Why do Europeans like to dimish the significant role America played in both world wars?
It's a counter reaction to the decades of propaganda how America saved Europe, how we would be speaking German without you, how we are ungrateful for American sacrifices in world wars for not joining in on the Iraq war etc. So people think fuck America, besides Russians did most of the fighting in WW2 and French and UK did in WW1 so it's not even counter factual to say that America didn't save Europe.

This. They teach you shit in Hollywood movies

LMAO you guys pussied out of WW1 because you realized you'd be better at starving than war.

Nobody is saying america didn't help, and you can't play the victim after decades of propaganda in books and movies about americans being the saviors of Europe

This. Winning WW2 is still part of the national identity of both countries. They absolutely start seething if someone tries to take it away from them.

>american historians
And then you wonder why people make fun of you

>tide turners in bot
Well, thats not exactly true.
in WW1 yes, they did basically secre the win.
But in WW2 the soviets would have pushed the Germans back and won anyway, they saved much of western europe from communism, but saying they turned the tide against Germany is just retarded, come on now

why do americans and russians like to take all the credit rather than admit the victories were a cooperative effort only made possible by our alliances to one another

Attached: file.png (236x236, 85K)

That's what decades of propaganda does to you. What they don't mention is that America hesitated for years to join WW2 because they didn't care about the jews either and large parts of America even supported Hitler before the war started.

We are both selfish countries.
The Brits were badass in both was though, kudos.

>americans unironically think they are some ww2 heroes

Because you want all credit for it. It was a collective effort and I'm thankful to Russian, Americans, bongs and everyone one who helped stop Germans.

Because we actually won WW2 singlehandedly while brits were busy shooting at germans from time to time in Africa and losing to cripples and kids at market garden

>Throwing millions of soldiers into a meat grinder is winning
The brilliant minds of Russian strategists

>zerg rushes mg placements on Omaha beach
Not even soviet were that callous with their men, just goes to show how inhumane Americans were.

Because Americans spent the beginning of the war making money selling weapons, so everyone else could beat each other to shit. Then, when everyone else is out of energy, they come in with their fresh soldiers and fancy new equipment and claim they are the saviours.

I do it because it drives Americans utterly apeshit. In truth I honestly don't care either way, though.

the anglos and germans both tried very cleverfully to involve us in ww1. fuck them

also daily reminder britain and france were irrelevant in both world wars. especially ww2

that wasnt a civilian ship retard, they were two explosions on it.

Nowadays people get mad at us for being the world police but not being the world police back then was a bad thing? Why would we have gotten involved with another European hissyfit for no reason? Made more sense just to give weapons to the people we like and make some money.

Germany was already losing when you got in. Sure you did your job but not that much.

reminder that poland held off the germans longer than the french

no way really

yes poland used its horsemen to hold off the german tanks, while the french ineffectively used their tanks against the german army

Well germans lost. Despite being unprepared for initial blitzkrieg and going throught modernization we only had 5 million combat losses, comparing to 4 million german losses. That's a pretty good result considering the circumstances. If germans were only a tiny bit human we wouldn't have suffered so much civilian and PoW casualities.
Mutts on the other had arrived armed to the teeth and.. Started losing to subpar german divisions that's kinda embarassing. Now poltard brainlets worship retards like Patton and McArthur even tho they didn't have even 1/10th of any soviet general talent.

Attached: YwW-yHQQjuY.jpg (600x433, 91K)

>civilian
it wasn't civilian
it was "civilian"
It carried civilian passengers and weaponry for the UK.

This is like making a case of the USAs bombings of hospitals in Iraq, while AA missiles were setup on top of these high buildings.

Let's not forget how we payed for Western Europe's postwar recovery

based and redpilled

most retarded ww2 reply ever. britain held sea and air superiority and secured their island all by themselfs. without britain as a safe haven for every exiled goverment and army from conquered europe it would have been a clear german victory on the west front.

Let's not forget that Marshall aid had a agenda of tying western countries to anti-soviet sphere and propping up economies so that American manufacturers would have markets.

Don't bother trying to reason with Americans. They always count civilians and killed pows as war casualties. Sometimes Americans even count their allied deaths as their enemy (like when they add South Vietnamese deaths to the death toll of Vietnam). Americans in general are very incapable at warfare (Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan all show this) they're just rich enough to proclaim a win

The truth is it took all 4 Entente powers in WW1 and all 3 Allied powers in WW2 to defeat us because we were just too OP back then. Alone, nobody would've been able to defeat us.

>Not even soviet were that callous with their men
Well, yes they were.

D-day was just a food note in history class. The only battles discussed were those at the Eastern front and Stalingrad.

No, Rushing at MG nests was never a thing on the eastern front, they were usually suppressed with tanks, artillery or mg fire first

Truth is when Germany attacked the USSR hundreds of thousands of Romanians, Italians, Hungarians, Frenchmen all attacked with the Germans. Germany alone would not be able to cover the front line

you soviets really did have incredible tacticians and strategists

Norwegians only think that Britain was relevant because it was the power that liberated them. No single person outside of the UK and Norway shares your opinion.

Germans were running for the hills once we arrived in Europe during WWI

no

themselves*
they most def did not hold air superiority if they were the ones getting bombed in the early stages of the war. maybe they held sea power, more than the germans, but to say they had more air power than the germans is retarded.

Bullshit.
Australians won the war.

Forgot to add Spainards and Finns

I didn't claim Germany could've defeated the USSR on its own. But neither would the USSR been able to defeat Germany without the US and UK.
The US bankrolled and supplied the Entente since the beginning of WW1.

>not one step backwards
>a good strategy
this is your brain on krokodil

But nobody denies your points and the fact remains the Marshall aids effectively rescued Western Europe and hold off the soviet hegemony on the verge of encroaching on it.

Just take Germany's view on it !
January 1943 Germany had

fighting the Russians: 191 divisions
vs.
fighting
UK forces+
USA forces+
Free France forces+
French terrorism+
Free Polish forces: 48 Divisions

at home: 3 Divsions
Vacationing in Norway: 12 Divisions
Vacationing in Finland 7 Divisions

The USA did a small comitment to fight Germany compared to Russia,
and certainly compaired to the size of the US population compared to Russias and esepcially comaprted to the size of Norway or the UK.

I wouldn't give the USA 50% responsibility of fighting the 48 divisions. designated to their part of the front.
The main part USA actually did is to feed the brittish civilians.

What if Spain had joined in the battle

Attached: download (5).png (275x183, 4K)

They spearheaded the Allied Hundred Days Offensive which broke through the Hindenburg line and threatenned Germany.

>The main part USA actually did is to feed the brittish civilians.

Pretty much. The primary role of the US in WWII was being the catering service.

>enemy is 70km away from your capital
>duhhhh not on step backwards?? what a inhumane strategy we americans would have done it different!

Attached: 1554916879259.png (800x660, 479K)

>hurr durr what is the Africa Front, what is the Italian Front, what is the battle of the Atlantic, what is the Pacific theater, what is D-Day, what is the western front, what is lend-lease, what is the destruction of the Luftwaffe, what is the strategic bombing campaign hurr burr durr

>French terrorism
based boche

Attached: 1538087370604.png (322x322, 68K)

USSR would have ran out of supplies and been long steamrolled without us and our LEND LEASE

Mostly irrelevant to what was going on on the Eastern front.

"Some say the Allies didn’t really help us… But listen, one cannot deny that the Americans shipped over to us material without which we could not have equipped our armies held in reserve or been able to continue the war." - Marshal G.K. Zhukov

>Mostly irrelevant to what was going on on the Eastern front.
1) According to whom? 2) The last three events affected the eastern front, and they did directly.

Yes, catering service. We've already mentioned that.

Which also translates to: "Hey this is an official statement to make americans feel better because all they actually did was supply germans before the war and UK during the war leaving the remains to USSR"

Why do germans still believe nazi propaganda
>couldn't take moscow
>couldn't take stalingrad
>couldn't take caucasus
>failed all their big offensives
>w- we c-couldn't h-h-have won muh zerg rush muh tigers
Parhetic

Attached: 1561568407911.jpg (849x594, 119K)

>1) According to whom?
Every major historian on the planet that cares about his reputation. Hollywood movies are not real life. Also thank you for your service.

just read a little about the battle of britain.

where should the normandy landings have been launched from if not britain?

No one cares about the Normandy landings apart from you guys and the other Western powers. The war was decided on the Eastern front and not in Normandy.

>Africa front
No US involved
>battle of the Atlantic
Based supply conveyors kek
>Pacific theatre
Gruesome indeed, but they could have let the nips on their remoted islands and no one would have noticed it. The most stupid war.
>D-Day
Massively overrated battle by propaganda, the shore was barely defended (3/4000 casualties on a 100 km front...)
>strategic bombing
A senseless war crime. pic related is Le Havre ffs.

Attached: PHO46041056-3507-11e4-99ab-aca933a9442f-805x453.jpg (805x453, 128K)

The logistical aspect of WW2 and how americans managed to use their industrial power to build a big, well equiped and sufficiently trained army in no time is more impressive than anything germans did

Attached: images (5).jpg (235x215, 8K)

“Cartering service” is a very strange way to put supplying goods that range from aircrafts to shoes.

>Every major historian on the planet that cares about his reputation.
From here you admit you are talking out of your ass. Don’t thank me and have a nice day.

Yes. They ran a very good catering service. I give you that.

It accurately describes America's contribution to the Soviet Victory in WWII, yes.

Extremely based.

>The US wasn't involved in the African Front
What is Operation Torch.

Maybe you should have taken exemple on them, gas can be useful for vehicles, as well as warm clothes in winter.

Because nothing was happening on the Pacific and the Mediterranean fronts at all.

Strategic bombing shortened the war dramatically you fucking retard. I'm not going to pretend the contributions of the Western Allies were equal to that of the USSR, but they certainly weren't inconsequential. The German war industry was decimated by strategic bombing and production of war materiel was significantly hampered, saving untold lives from potentially dying to a more reinforced and better equipped Wehrmacht.

Daily reminder that Greece btfo'd Italy

Nothing that affected the outcome of the war except for the Soviet invasion of Manchuria which was the significant factor in contributing towards Japan's unconditional surrender because before that they expected the Soviet Union to act as a mediator in the negotiations with the US.

>They spearheaded the Allied Hundred Days Offensive which broke through the Hindenburg line and threatenned Germany.
>spearheaded
You can't be further from the truth. Go open a book and reinform yourself

based

>Don’t thank me
Thank you for your service.

Indeed

Attached: World_War_II_military_deaths_in_Europe_by_theater_and_by_year.png (1368x724, 135K)

Based

Hollywood propaganda turned out to be very effective

Attached: sondage.jpg (1272x861, 153K)

>US: 180 000
How can anyone seeing this number honestly claim that the US contribution was significant?

>the ultimate surrender of Japan was precisely about the Soviet invasions
Sorry but this is merely your revisionist opinion. The Soviet operation in Manchuria was simply another nail to the coffin that sealed Japan’s fate.

For your argument to stand, the Soviets needed to have the materials and the capabilities to make a land invasion of Japan which they did not have.

"American" jews played a big role yes.

All due respect for the Pacific effort, but
a) it was none of anyone else's business
b) the scale was absolutely tiny compared to the European theater.

And in Europe itself you arrived just in time to reap the benefits of other countries' years long struggle without doing much of note yourself.

Your greatest war effort probably wasn't even the war, it was the following 70 years of never-ending self-promotion to coax the world into believing you've saved it.

Attached: 1463887455547.jpg (1271x854, 152K)

this is the usual European response. But it is also the most logical one too.

And I will not even address their case in WW1

>france talking shit

Attached: 1079px-France_map_Lambert-93_with_regions_and_departments-occupation.svg.png (1079x1024, 428K)

>War is CoD where getting the most kills =win
This is why nobody takes Jow Forums seriously.

>USSR 10.6
into the trash your shitty chart goes

its another sovietabu pretending US lendlease didnt exist episode