Bruce Wilson of Courier Mail says U.S. role in WWII was very small. (Via Drudge)

Drudge Report ^ | July 6 2002 | Bruce Wilson

[mrfixit514]

In response to emails about an article he wrote bashing Bush, Wilson writes:

They ran on two levels: "Come to Texas . . . and we'll show ya." And, "We saved your asses and if you keep this stuff up we won't do it again."

Some were so offensive I replied in kind. Some I tried to tell that the US came very late into World War II and Britain already had fought its two major battles without them.

[vbmoneyspender]

Oh, I am sorry, the Brits fought for 6 days at Singapore and on the 7th day they gave their unconditional surrender. I guess technically that doesn't count as surrending without a fight.

[vbmoneyspender]

By the same token, we should recognize that the Brits fought on when there was no rational reason for them to believe that they could win . . . .

A large part of the credit for that goes to Churchill, but then again, he was half American.

[crazyhorseoglala]

You said it! Private Ryan was a movie, but its realism shook me to tears to see American soldiers slaughtered at Omaha Beach. How many American men and women died in WWII?
Hey Wilson, who the hell was shooting at those Americans
anyway? The British?

[Little Bill]

You misread my post, if I remember correctly, the OZites fought until THEY were ordered to surrender, took some heavy KIA and WIA, the limey General had no Balls, typical, and spent the rest of the war as a Jap baglapper.

POSTING gods pull if you wish, I spent some time with the 6th RAR, true men.

[dtel]

The piece of shrapnel lodged in my wife's grandfather is pretty small also.
This pisses me off too.

[Bringbackthedraft]

Lend lease, mass production of bombers for England, yes, we built their 4 engine bombers too. We provided war ships and a merchant marine all before Dec.7th. Yup, and we were neutral. Huge amounts of Studebaker trucks, locomotives, tanks and fighter aircraft for the Russians. England was on the ropes and Hitler was stupid. Had he invaded England instead of Russia I would have given England 4-6 months. The Royals would have fled to Canada. Austrailia would have fallen to the Imperial Japanese Army. Had the Germans gone over to daily code changes and operational codes the war may have taken a different direction. English victories were easy when you knew in advance what the other guy was up to. Without the help of our industry alone, England would have been Kaput.

[TransOxus]

The Russians fully backed Germany until Operation Barbarossa in 1941 when Hitler decided he would concentrate on the East front rather than on the West front. Amazing how close and easily the Germans could have defeated Britain but the armies were told to stop, curtail, or divert their forces elsewhere when within another week they could have claimed complete victory.

Similarly, the Russians escaped German annihilation when Barbarossa was postponed by a few weeks which pushed forward the German invasion into the winter months which had defeated other like Napoleon before. This fortuitous postponement was courtesy of the Yugoslavs or Serbs who said up yours to Hitler and got rid of quislings when told to capitulate which enraged Hitler and made him decide to go after the Serbs first - a significant blunder.

The Americans came late into the war but without that support and entry by the USA and then the Russians to back Britain, the Germans could have eventually won and made the world a rotten place to live in. It took four years for the rest of the world or Allies to defeat the Germans and then stop Japan courtesy of nukes. One has to look with respect at the fighting spirit and organization of the Krauts and the Japs which required the rest of the world four years to defeat these two enemy countries. But without the U.S., the remaining Allies would have been toast in WW-2.

Hitler is stated to have observed that FDR was a National Socialist like the Nazis but despite having come to power at around the same time as Hitler, FDR did not accomplish what Hitler had accomplished. Hitler felt FDR was jealous!! Of course Hitler used his Secret Army (formed and led by a bunch of blatant homosexuals and perverts who were its generals and officers), then the Secret Service and the Gestapo to achieve his aims by force. Interesting to see that Hitler acknowledges that the U.S. Democrats subscribe to Nazism.

The only rotten thing in the Allied victory was that Stalin was the only other powerful dictator with Hitler gone. We know what a mess the commies inflicted later on world peace for the next fifty years. Should have gone after Stalin too in 1945.

[Restorer]

No argument.

However, my point is that without the bravery and stubborness of Churchill and the millions who cheerfully followed him, our war would have been far longer and bloodier. Just think about what would have happened if the British had surrendered as quickly as the French. And they could have easily done it without having to be occupied or even give up any of their Empire (except maybe for some pieces they took from the Germans after WWI).

Hitler didn't WANT to fight the British. He actually, sincerely wanted to be their friends. He saw them as the Aryans who would control the inferior races overseas, while the Germans dealt with those of Europe and the Middle East.

[PoisedWoman]

- the US was only a minor factor in WWII. Tell it to the Marines.

And tell it to the thousands upon thousands of American families whose sons were killed "over there." One every block, mothers were flying those little gold star flags in their windows indicating they'd lost a son. Still, they showed up to roll bandages for those who were still fighting.

[KAUAIBOUND]

Without the industrial strength of the US, which began to supply the English in 1940, the Brits could have never won. Also, the bulk of the Allied forces in North Africa (the only ground fighting between the English and the Germans from May 1940 until mid 1943) were non-English - Aussie, New Zealanders, South Africans, Indians and even a Jewish brigade.

[RossA]

And Europe (all of it) would have been (and would still be) Russian satellite states, assuming the Russians won.

[stumpy]

Truly the carnage at Normandy was tremendous. In boot camp I saw color footage of the assault at "bloody Tarawa", where it's estimated a thousand marines and sailors died in the lagoon before the first marine made it onto the sand. The lagoon was pink. The actor Eddie Albert was one of the guys driving the boats to get the Marines ashore.

[irish_lad]

I just sent the little faggot an email. What a gutless wimp.

[Restorer]

Some actual dead in WWII.

US: 407,000

Britain: 403,000

Germany: 3,250,000 + 2,500,0000 civilian dead

USSR: 11,585,000 + 18,000,000 civilian dead

We really got out of it easy, by comparison. The Soviets lost over 900,000 offiers, more than twice as many as we did in total!

[Restorer]

>>Amazing how close and easily the Germans could have defeated Britain but the armies were told to stop, curtail, or divert their forces elsewhere when within another week they could have claimed complete victory.

Not hardly. Three little problems: RAF, Royal Navy and the English Channel. Hitler was unable to gain air superiority over Britain. Without it any attempt to cross the Channel would have resulted in a massive slaughter by the RN and RAF.

Now he could have put his massive new resources from France, Belgium, Poland, Netherlands, etc. into production of planes and ships and within a year or two have had enough to overwhelm the Brits. To that extent I agree with you. But any attempt to cross the Channel or launch an airborne invasion in 1940 would have resulted in a catastrophic German defeat.

Perhaps, however, you were talking about the German failure to destroy the British Army at Dunkirk, which they could easily have done. Hitler didn't do this primarily because he assumed the British would reach an accomodation with him as the French were in the process of doing. He didn't really hate the British in the same way he hated the French, in fact he admired them immensely.

[RightOnline]

"The Soviets lost over 900,000 offiers, more than twice as many as we did in total!"

True, and in no way do I say this to belittle the incredible sacrifices of the Russian people during The Great War, but HUGE numbers of those dead can be directly attributed to Stalin's shocking hubris and incompetence. That is a fact.

[jordan8]

Here are the actual casualty figures:

U.S. casualties in WW2 (source: Grolier's).

Battle Deaths: 292,131

Other Deaths: 115,187

Total Dead: 407,318

Wounded: 671,801

Missing or Captured: 139,709

Total Dead or Wounded: 1,025,119

UK: (source: The Encyclopedia of Facts and Figures)

KIA/MIA 305,800

WIA 277,100

POW 172,600

Civilian Casualties 146,800

Total Killed/Wounded 729,700

Battle Deaths: U.S. 292,131 vs. UK 244,723

I jump into arguments on Brit boards about this and love to post these figures. The average Brit has no idea, and is crestfallen to learn the U.S. suffered more casualties than Blighty in WW2.

[Ahban]

Its not how many of ours died fighting them that counts- its how many of THEIRS died fighting US.

Americans won the war because Americans are good at killing people.

[jordan8]

The total U.S. killed or wounded should be 1,079,119 not 1,025,119.

[Restorer]

>>HUGE numbers of those dead can be directly attributed to Stalin's shocking hubris and incompetence. That is a fact.

Absolutely. Among other things, in the year or two before the war, he executed almost every Soviet officer of field grade. Great idea just before going into battle against the blitzkrieg!

Supposedly he did this because he was convinced by a German secret agent that his officers were planning a coup against him (and possibly they were).

There is good documentation that he was planning to double-cross Hitler and attack him in a couple of years, but of course Hitler beat him to the punch. Stalin wasn't used to being the one who got double-crossed!