The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

TheVlad
I think the US were instrumental in ending WWI as Germany was doing rather well against the Allies before American involvement.

The US were not important in WWI and indeed the arrival of their troops slowed the Allied advance and thus victory due to their lack of familiarity with trench warfare. The US entry into the Alliance provided a morale boost and precious little else at a time when the war was already approaching its conclusion. Anyway the point was regarding the percieved saving of France by the yankees when in reality France would have been overrun had it not been for British intervention in WWI (years before the johnny come lately yankees).
As for WWII it was all the Soviet Union, which started winning the war in '43, way before D-day and all that.

The Soviet union was important yes but to say it was all down to them is absolutely laughable. The USSR could not have defeated the Germans singlehandedly anymore than the British Empire or the USA could have. Lets not forget either that the USSR was provided with most of its equipment armament etc by the other two great powers.
Reply 81
an Siarach
The US were not important in WWI and indeed the arrival of their troops slowed the Allied advance and thus victory due to their lack of familiarity with trench warfare. The US entry into the Alliance provided a morale boost and precious little else at a time when the war was already approaching its conclusion.

ok, you sound like you know what you're talking about.

The Soviet union was important yes but to say it was all down to them is absolutely laughable. The USSR could not have defeated the Germans singlehandedly anymore than the British Empire or the USA could have.

Perhaps not singlehandedly... but the USSR did about 80% of teh work in defeating Germany. The Allies didn't do that much between 1941-44, in reality and had the D-day landings not taken place, Germany would still have lost, it would simply have taken longer.
TheVlad
Perhaps not singlehandedly... but the USSR did about 80% of teh work in defeating Germany. The Allies didn't do that much between 1941-44, in reality and had the D-day landings not taken place, Germany would still have lost, it would simply have taken longer.

The argument that germany would still have lost only it would have taken longer could be spun around to favour any faction. As has been previously shown in the thread such 'what if?' conjecture is impossible to debate satisfactorily and the only mutually agreeable conclusion possible imo is simply that none of the three great allied powers of USA,BE,USSR could single handedly have defeated the Axis within a remotely similiar timeframe to that which historically occurred. To ponder what might have can never be based upon anything other than (albeit educated and enjoyable) conjecture.
Reply 83
an Siarach
The argument that germany would still have lost only it would have taken longer could be spun around to favour any faction. As has been previously shown in the thread such 'what if?' conjecture is impossible to debate satisfactorily and the only mutually agreeable conclusion possible imo is simply that none of the three great allied powers of USA,BE,USSR could single handedly have defeated the Axis within a remotely similiar timeframe to that which historically occurred. To ponder what might have can never be based upon anything other than (albeit educated and enjoyable) conjecture.


But the fact is that by the time Britain and the US invaded France, Germany had been retreating on the Eastern Front for more than a year.
TheVlad
But the fact is that by the time Britain and the US invaded France, Germany had been retreating on the Eastern Front for more than a year.

And if BE and USA hadnt been involved then the entirity of the German Navy,Fleet,Luftwaffe,African forces etc etc would have been free to deal with the USSR whereas in reality they were being occupied(either in direct conflict or through defensive fortification) and defeated on all fronts by us. If BE and USA hadnt been involved the USSR would not have been able to equip its troops.There really isnt any point in starting up another one of these arguments for all the reasons already mentioned.
Reply 85
Britain invading = Defeat
Russia invading = Stalemate

Britain has the logistics to get an expeditionary force but the Russians would probably just arrest them. Likewise, Russia can't move any of its rusting, shoddy Soviet-era equipment. It's laughable to even suggest that they could land on the south coast when their navy is currently rusting.
Reply 86
Plus, they'd be so drunk off Vodka, by the time they'd get to England, they'd just pass out.
Reply 87
Alique
Britain invading = Defeat
Russia invading = Stalemate

Britain has the logistics to get an expeditionary force but the Russians would probably just arrest them. Likewise, Russia can't move any of its rusting, shoddy Soviet-era equipment. It's laughable to even suggest that they could land on the south coast when their navy is currently rusting.

It is currently rusting because modern Russia has no need for such a large navy, it wouldn't be if the Soviet Union was still around.
Reply 88
spikdboy
Plus, they'd be so drunk off Vodka, by the time they'd get to England, they'd just pass out.

Russians are not lightweights like the English. Do not underestimate the amount of vodka we can drink without passing out.
Reply 89
TheVlad
Russians are not lightweights like the English. Do not underestimate the amount of vodka we can drink without passing out.

And you don't underestimate the amount of vodka you drink. You might not be heavy weights, but you drink enough to kill an elephant.
Reply 90
spikdboy
And you don't underestimate the amount of vodka you drink. You might not be heavy weights, but you drink enough to kill an elephant.

Well the military only get one measure of vodka per day. They simply cannot acquire more for reasons of its relatively high cost. Therefore they would sober and through withdrawal symptoms (all alcoholics naturally) very very mean. Us British will stand no chance against us Russians. oooh paradox.
Reply 91
TheVlad
Well the military only get one measure of vodka per day. They simply cannot acquire more for reasons of its relatively high cost. Therefore they would sober and through withdrawal symptoms (all alcoholics naturally) very very mean. Us British will stand no chance against us Russians. oooh paradox.

Are you a ruskie?
Reply 92
if your not drinking vodka your probly buying up british football clubs/properties
Reply 93
spikdboy
Are you a ruskie?

yes, I'd rather I weren't, then I could go to Russia without the fear of conscription. Ah the irony.
Reply 94
TheVlad
yes, I'd rather I weren't, then I could go to Russia without the fear of consription. Ah the irony.

Yeah - a taxi driver of mine in Greece was Russian. He said he came here because he hated being in the Russian army. Don't they treat the soldiers terribly?
Reply 95
Could whoever gave me the rep please explain what they meant by: "irony :frown:"? I'm just interested to know what that means exactly??
Reply 96
TheVlad
Could whoever gave me the rep please explain what they meant by: "irony :frown:"? I'm just interested to know what that means exactly??

Haha.. for what post?
Reply 97
spikdboy
Haha.. for what post?

The last one I made, about conscription. I just think it is ironic that as a Russian citizen I cannot travel to Russia where as my single nationality British friends can.

The Russian military is horrible at the moment. Right now the soldiers are treated so badly and the training they are given is so dismal that even the tiny British army could probably defeat them.
Reply 98
TheVlad
The last one I made, about conscription. I just think it is ironic that as a Russian citizen I cannot travel to Russia where as my single nationality British friends can.

The Russian military is horrible at the moment. Right now the soldiers are treated so badly and the training they are given is so dismal that even the tiny British army could probably defeat them.

Yeah, there was a story about it in the Economist. It sounds terrible. (And that is quite ironic :smile:)

Latest

Trending

Trending