Yahoo Answers is shutting down on 4 May 2021 (Eastern Time) and, as of 20 April 2021 (Eastern Time), the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Why don't US WW2 historians acknowledge that the Soviet Union played a greater role in the defeat of Hitler's Germany than the US did?
This is not to say that it was not our 2nd bloodiest war, ever, as far as US casualties, nor that we played an insignificant role. The reason Americans don't know about the US made P-39 fighter, with it's massize 37mm cannon, was that we gave about half the 10,000 of them we built to the Soviets. That's one example of many things we did to help.
I'm stunned and amazed that about 99% of Americans believe lying American revisionist historians who say that the Anglo-American invasion of France at Normandy in 1944 turned the war. At that point, it's VERY WELL DOCUMENTED that Stalin's Soviet Union was winning. They had, in fact, pushed Hitler back BEHIND where he had invaded from, despite the fact that Germany had succeeded in driving all the way east to Stalingrad, before they started losing. The German disaster at Stalingrad, where they lost a major campaign and over a million casualties (if you include the prisoners of war), occurred about a year and a half before the Normandy invasions, and it was the turning point in the European theater.
I feel very strongly that it's NOT patriotic to be ignorant of those realities.
Please forgive me. Total axis casualties from the Stalingrad campaign were over 800,000, but less than the million I quoted. It was an honest mistake. I had no intent to deceive, and I wasn't far off.
I'm not sure if I'm being misunderstood. I'm NOT putting the US down. As has been pointed out, USA beat Japan, without major help from any major country in the Pacific, while giving a great deal of effort in Europe. I admire the courage of our MILLIONS of servicemen who made the commitment to win. It's just that, when I hear something like: "The Normandy invasions were the turning point of the war," the lying turns my stomach. We don't have to lie to honor our fine soldiers and sailors.
- StephenWeinsteinLv 71 month ago
It's also ignorant to make it sound like the Soviet army was responsible. What really stopped the Germans from reaching Moscow and drive them back was the as what stopped Napoleon's army from reaching Moscow and drive them back: the weather.
- RICKLv 71 month ago
Without America giving the Soviet Union the weapons with which to fight the Soviet Union would have surrendered to Germany in 1943.
So yes America did have more to do with it than Russia did
- 1 month ago
I think U.S. historians do acknowledge this. It is well known that the eastern front severely drained Nazi Germany's fighting capacity over the course of the war at the cost of an outsized number of casualties. But U.S. historians will naturally focus on the things that matter to U.S. historians, which is the role of Americans during WWII. There is certainly no shortage of material.
- USAFisnumber1Lv 71 month ago
Sure. The USSR did not fight against the Italians. The USSR did not fight against the Japanese. They left all THAT fighting to everyone else. So whoopie, they gave the most for the fight against one of the three Axis powers. And by the way, they also took over the three Baltic States and tried to take over Finland.
- What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
- Jeff SLv 71 month ago
Probably because BEFORE America started supplying Russia with war material Hitler was knocking on Stalin's door(Moscow)!
- 1 month ago
Actually Communist Russia (USSR) started WW2, and was aligned with Germany in their joint invasion of Poland in 1939.