The Instigator
TheRussian
Pro (for)
Winning
5 Points
The Contender
pariashi
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Allies would have won WW2 without America.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
TheRussian
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/8/2014 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 921 times Debate No: 54291
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (9)
Votes (1)

 

TheRussian

Pro

I will be arguing that the Allies WOULD have won without America. Please begin your argument.
pariashi

Con

No.
The U.S supplied Great Britain, the USSR, Republic of China, Free France, and others Allied nations with materiel between 1940 and August 1945.

A total of $50.1 billion (equivalent to $650 billion today) worth of supplies were shipped. That represented 17% of the total war expenditures of the U.S. In all, $31.4 billion went to Britain, $11.3 billion to the Soviet Union, $3.2 billion to France, $1.6 billion to China, and smaller sums to other Allies.

The U.S Industry produced over 2,382,311 military vehicles.

102,410 Tanks and Self - propelled guns
99,950 Fighter Aircraft
97,810 Light and medium bombers
35,366 Four-engined bombers
257,390 Artillery (including Anti-tank and anti-aircraft guns)
105,054 Infantry weapons: Mortars
2,679,840 Infantry weapons: Machine-guns (without sub-machine guns)
11,750,000 Infantry weapons: rifles
1,956,000 Infantry weapons: sub-machine guns
3,918 Reconnaissance planes
141 Aircraft carriers
8 Battleships
48 Cruisers
349 Destroyers
498 Escorts (Corvettes, Frigates)
203 Submarines

The 1940 Destroyers for Bases Agreement, whereby 50 US Navy destroyers were transferred to the Royal Navy and the Royal Canadian Navy in exchange for basing rights in the Caribbean.

The USSR received hundreds of thousands of military vehicles and motorbikes. Lack of fuel was ameliorated with deliveries of 2.5 million tons of petroleum products. The profusion of Roosevelt's "garden hose" provided Stalin with 595 ships, including 28 frigates, 105 submarines, 77 trawlers, 22 torpedo boats, 140 anti-submarine vessels and others. The Soviet air force received 4,952 Aerocobra and 2,410 Kingcobra fighter jets. Soviet pilot Alexander Pokryshkin fought with Hitler's Luftwaffe aces in Aerocobra planes, which made him a Hero of the Soviet Union hero three times over.

The lend-lease agreement supplied the USSR with 2,7 thousand A-20 and 861 B-25 bomber planes. Soviet tank divisions received 7,056 tanks, 8,218 anti-aircraft emplacements, 131,600 machine guns and other arms. The USA provided the Soviets with 501,660 tactical wheeled and tracked vehicles, including 77,972 jeeps, 151,053 1-1/2-ton trucks, and 200,622 2-1/2-ton trucks.

Soviet propaganda tried to diminish the importance of the American help. Back in those years, it was said that the Soviet Union had produced 30,000 tanks and 40,000 planes since the middle of 1943. Well, as a matter of fact, this was true. However, one has to take into consideration the fact that lend and lease deliveries were made to the USSR during the most difficult period of the war - during the second half of 1942. In addition, the USSR would not have been capable of producing its arms without the lend-lease agreement: The USA shipped 2.3 million tons of steel to the USSR during the WWII years. That volume of steel was enough for the production of 70,000 T-34 tanks. Aluminum was received in the volume of 229,000 tons, which helped the Soviet aviation and tank industries to run for two years. One has to mention food deliveries as well: 3.8 million tons of tinned pork, sausages, butter, chocolate, egg powder and so on. The lend-lease agreement provided orderlies with 423,000 telephones and tens of thousands of wireless stations. Deliveries also included oil distillation equipment, field bakeries, tents, parachutes, and so on and so forth. The Soviet Union also received 15 million pairs of army boots.

The help was delivered to the USSR via Iran and major Soviet sea ports. About 3,000 transport vessels arrived at the ports of Murmansk, Arkhangelsk and Vladivostok, and delivered 1.3 million tons of cargo. It would be incorrect to diminish the significance of such all-embracing help from the United States as a serious factor that assisted in the victorious ending of the war.

The Soviet Union had also pressed the United States and United Kingdom to start operations in Europe and open a second front to reduce the pressure of German forces on the Soviet troops

The U.S favored Operation Sledgehammer, landing in Occupied Europe as soon as possible, but the British commanders believed that such a course would end in disaster.

So an attack on French North Africa was proposed instead, which would clear the Axis powers from North Africa and improve naval control of the Mediterranean Sea, and prepare for an invasion of Southern Europe in 1943.
Debate Round No. 1
TheRussian

Pro

My opponent has provided a very good case, but I will now prove that even without the US, the Allies had all the means necessary to defeat the Axis powers.

Let's compare Allies vs. Axis if the US had not joined in.
_RAW RESOURCES_
Coal (in millions of tons)
Allies: 2,133.9
Axis: 2,700

Iron Ore (in millions of tons)
Allies: 194.1
Axis: 261.7

Crude Oil (in millions of tons)
Allies: 209.8
Axis: 38.6

_NAVY_
Aircraft carriers:
Allies: 14
Axis: 16

Battleships:
Allies: 5
Axis: 7

Cruisers:
Allies: 34
Axis: 15

Destroyers:
Allies: 266
Axis: 86

Convoy escorts:
Allies: 757
Axis: 210

Submarines:
Allies: 219
Axis: 1,301
(With the US, the Allies still only had about 400 submarines. The Allies were still at a very heavy disadvantage.)

_AIR FORCE_
Fighter aircraft
Allies: 113,500
Axis: 94,310

Bombers
Allies: 58,490
Axis: 35,550

Transport aircraft
Allies: 19,100
Axis: 5,670

_LAND SYSTEMS_
Tanks and SPGs
Allies: 94,600
Axis: 45,100

Artillery pieces
Allies: 685,050
Axis: 179,750

Mortars
Allies: 303,250
Axis: 73,480

Machine-guns
Allies: 2,026,700
Axis: 1,054,000

Military trucks
Allies: 942,100
Axis: 594,840

It is clear from the above that even without the US, the Allies still had a very large advantage and would be able to defeat the Axis powers. Lack of German logistics and oil would take its toll, allowing Allies to easily transport troops/equipment and surround/choke the German forces. I will also note that the US provided nearly none of the most important resource, humans. Almost all the losses were taken by other countries.
http://en.wikipedia.org...

In regards to D-Day, the attackers suffered 4 times as many casualties as the defending Germans. Not only that, but less than a third of the German forces were located on the Western flank, almost all of Germany's forces were trying to hold off the Soviet advance on the East. Overall, the D-Day invasion played little to no role in helping the Soviet armies make it to Berlin. The Germans knew that Americans would treat them better than the Russians, so they did everything they could to "allow" the Americans to take them over before the Soviets could, leaving almost no resistance to fend off the Western allies and concentrating their efforts on holding off the Soviets long enough. It obviously didn't work.

In the end, I see no reason why the Allies would not be able to defeat the Axis without the US. On to Con.
pariashi

Con

While it is true the USSR had a heavy hand in Germany's surrender, Britain would have almost certainly been destroyed without American help. America helped the allies by sending in aircraft, men, and dropping bombs on Germany. America took part in Germany's surrender by assisting in many battles such as d-day. Without America, these battles may not have been won, and Germany would have overtook Britain.
Debate Round No. 2
TheRussian

Pro

Germany did not step foot in Britain. They hoped to defeat the British solely through air raids by the Luftwaffe that proved ineffective. D-Day did not contribute to the safety of Britain because by that stage in the war, Germany was too weak to attack Britain and had its own problems on the Eastern flank. D-Day was an attack and therefore, even if the Allies did not win that battle, Britain still would be safe. I do not see how D-Day contributed to Britain's security. D-Day, as mentioned in my first argument, proved to be a unnecessary operation. The Soviet operation to capture Berlin began months before D-Day, meaning that the Allies were already on the way to victory.

In the first argument, I established that in regards to vehicles/supplies, the Allies would still have an enormous advantage over the Axis even without America. In the above paragraph, I have established that America's contributions in men was also minimal.
Here are the main Allies by men lost:
Soviet Union: 25,000,000
France: 550,000
Great Britain: 450,900
America: 418,500
http://www.secondworldwarhistory.com...

Considering all of the above, I still do not see why the Allies would not be able to defeat the Axis powers without the help of the US.
pariashi

Con

I would again have to say no because i believe without the Americans the war would of dragged on longer and in 1945 the Nazi's had built Stealth Fighters that could go undetected by radar the Horten ho 229 but
they didn't have the chance to put them into mass production if there had been more time they would of had a chance to put them into mass production and also by 1946 the Nazi's would of had a nuclear weapon ready.If you took the US, UK, or the Russians out f the scenario it may have ended in a German victory. All three were extremely important to the war effort.

We (the US) were late to join the war (Roosevelt practically dragged us in kicking and screaming), but we committed vast amounts of money, supplies, and aid even before we got involved (roughly 50 billion in aid). Without which the UK may not have been able to hold out. Then again, had we gotten involved earlier, the UK wouldn't have had to hold out the way they did and the war may have ended much faster. Once involved though, we played a major role. There is no one country that won the war, it was a combined effort of all the allied forces.

Canada also played a major role in helping with the supplies to win (roughly 3.5 billion in aid), though I wouldn't say they were a lynch pin, they were never the less extremely helpful. They lost 45,000 troops, but in comparison to the rest of the allies, it was their financial support that was the true value.

Remember Pearl Harbor? You know the Nazis were not the only enemy in that war. We played a HUGE role in the Pacific, in fact we damn near beat the Japanese alone. The UK didn't even form a Pacific Fleet until 1944. The ALLIES won the war. All of us together. Don't act like we had no part. The UK lost 380,000 and the US lost 416,000

The UK finished paying back the US in 2004 and Canada in 2006. As I mentioned Canada was very important, but you seem to paint a picture that you were more important than the rest of the allies.

@Needful - Because Canada's contribution wasn't the question. You had a one sentence answer, then went off on a rant. The 50 billion we contributed DIDN'T end the war. It's likely that without the support of the UK, Russians, AND US ... the war may not have been winnable. The Russians NEEDED another front or they would have negotiated a cease fire. They even said so. Without them stretching out the Nazi forces on the Russian front, the UK may not have been able to hold the Nazis back. The US provided that front, which kept the Russians in the war. As I said above, the ALLIES won. All of us together.

-EDIT TO ALL-
There is no single hero in WWII -- EVERYONE who fought was a hero and we came together as one single force dedicated to ending the tyranny of the Nazi Regime. We dropped our nationalism, our petty squabbles, and our differences to overcome evil. Basically what some seem to be saying is that we didn't need to unite. We did need to, that's the reason it was called a WORLD WAR.

Source(s):
http://channel.nationalgeographic.com......
http://www.unmuseum.org...
http://channel.nationalgeographic.com......
Rate Comment
Debate Round No. 3
TheRussian

Pro

"without the Americans the war would of dragged on longer and in 1945 the Nazi's had built Stealth Fighters that could go undetected by radar the Horten ho 229 but they didn't have the chance to put them into mass production if there had been more time they would of had a chance to put them into mass production"
There were only 2 prototypes of the Horton Ho 229 were ever built. This was an expensive plane and it would be difficult to put into mass production at this stage in the war. Also, without modern computers to aid the pilot, it would be nearly impossible to maneuver this kind of aircraft, making its use in the war impractical.
http://www.militaryfactory.com...

"by 1946 the Nazi's would of had a nuclear weapon ready."
Many sources suggest that the Nazis would not have developed usable nuclear weapons for a long time, they were far behind the Allies.

"If you took the US, UK, or the Russians out f the scenario it may have ended in a German victory. All three were extremely important to the war effort."
Although I agree that the three were extremely important, WW2 could have been won by Allies without America or without UK. If neither joined, then it would be lost.

"Canada also played a major role"
Definitely not. Canada helped the US along, but was not significant.

"Remember Pearl Harbor? You know the Nazis were not the only enemy in that war. We played a HUGE role in the Pacific, in fact we damn near beat the Japanese alone."
Yes, I remember Pearl Harbor and am fully aware that the Nazis were not alone. Although the US played a large role in the defeat of Japan, the Soviet invasion of Manchuria also played a key role in the defeat of Japan. The Soviet invasion was the event that pushed the Japanese leaders to agree to an unconditional surrender.
http://www.history.com...

"Don't act like we had no part. "
I don't act like the US had no part but I have said, and I will say again, that the war could have been won without the US. Look at the statistics I provided in Round 2. It is evident that the Allies had every chance to defeat the the Axis without the US.

"but you seem to paint a picture that you were more important than the rest of the allies."
I am not more important, but the USSR was the largest contributor to the war because it took the brunt of the German attack, but that is irrelevant and is not the subject of debate.

"The Russians NEEDED another front or they would have negotiated a cease fire."
As mentioned, less than a third of German forces were located on the Western flank. The Germans were already occupied trying to fend off the Soviet advance. D-Day had little impact on the positioning of the main German forces.

"Basically what some seem to be saying is that we didn't need to unite. We did need to, that's the reason it was called a WORLD WAR."
I agree, we needed to unite because no single country would be able to stand alone, but I am arguing that the war could have been won without the US involvement.

In conclusion, I believe that the Allies would have won WW2 without the US because:
1. The Allies (without the US) still would have had a heavy advantage over the Axis in terms of vehicles and weapons. (Shown in Round 2)
2. America's support with manpower was small compared to the other Allies.

Thank you for the debate.
pariashi

Con

No. The more they're, the more are the chances of their victory. If USA hadn't intervened, the Allies would surely have been defeated.The U.S supplied Great Britain, the USSR, Republic of China, Free France, and others Allied nations with materiel between 1940 and August 1945.

A total of $50.1 billion (equivalent to $650 billion today) worth of supplies were shipped. That represented 17% of the total war expenditures of the U.S. In all, $31.4 billion went to Britain, $11.3 billion to the Soviet Union, $3.2 billion to France, $1.6 billion to China, and smaller sums to other Allies.

The U.S Industry produced over 2,382,311 military vehicles.

102,410 Tanks and Self - propelled guns
99,950 Fighter Aircraft
97,810 Light and medium bombers
35,366 Four-engined bombers
257,390 Artillery (including Anti-tank and anti-aircraft guns)
105,054 Infantry weapons: Mortars
2,679,840 Infantry weapons: Machine-guns (without sub-machine guns)
11,750,000 Infantry weapons: rifles
1,956,000 Infantry weapons: sub-machine guns
3,918 Reconnaissance planes
141 Aircraft carriers
8 Battleships
48 Cruisers
349 Destroyers
498 Escorts (Corvettes, Frigates)
203 Submarines

The 1940 Destroyers for Bases Agreement, whereby 50 US Navy destroyers were transferred to the Royal Navy and the Royal Canadian Navy in exchange for basing rights in the Caribbean.

The USSR received hundreds of thousands of military vehicles and motorbikes. Lack of fuel was ameliorated with deliveries of 2.5 million tons of petroleum products. The profusion of Roosevelt's "garden hose" provided Stalin with 595 ships, including 28 frigates, 105 submarines, 77 trawlers, 22 torpedo boats, 140 anti-submarine vessels and others. The Soviet air force received 4,952 Aerocobra and 2,410 Kingcobra fighter jets. Soviet pilot Alexander Pokryshkin fought with Hitler's Luftwaffe aces in Aerocobra planes, which made him a Hero of the Soviet Union hero three times over.

The lend-lease agreement supplied the USSR with 2,7 thousand A-20 and 861 B-25 bomber planes. Soviet tank divisions received 7,056 tanks, 8,218 anti-aircraft emplacements, 131,600 machine guns and other arms. The USA provided the Soviets with 501,660 tactical wheeled and tracked vehicles, including 77,972 jeeps, 151,053 1-1/2-ton trucks, and 200,622 2-1/2-ton trucks.

Soviet propaganda tried to diminish the importance of the American help. Back in those years, it was said that the Soviet Union had produced 30,000 tanks and 40,000 planes since the middle of 1943. Well, as a matter of fact, this was true. However, one has to take into consideration the fact that lend and lease deliveries were made to the USSR during the most difficult period of the war - during the second half of 1942. In addition, the USSR would not have been capable of producing its arms without the lend-lease agreement: The USA shipped 2.3 million tons of steel to the USSR during the WWII years. That volume of steel was enough for the production of 70,000 T-34 tanks. Aluminum was received in the volume of 229,000 tons, which helped the Soviet aviation and tank industries to run for two years. One has to mention food deliveries as well: 3.8 million tons of tinned pork, sausages, butter, chocolate, egg powder and so on. The lend-lease agreement provided orderlies with 423,000 telephones and tens of thousands of wireless stations. Deliveries also included oil distillation equipment, field bakeries, tents, parachutes, and so on and so forth. The Soviet Union also received 15 million pairs of army boots.

The help was delivered to the USSR via Iran and major Soviet sea ports. About 3,000 transport vessels arrived at the ports of Murmansk, Arkhangelsk and Vladivostok, and delivered 1.3 million tons of cargo. It would be incorrect to diminish the significance of such all-embracing help from the United States as a serious factor that assisted in the victorious ending of the war.

The Soviet Union had also pressed the United States and United Kingdom to start operations in Europe and open a second front to reduce the pressure of German forces on the Soviet troops

The U.S favored Operation Sledgehammer, landing in Occupied Europe as soon as possible, but the British commanders believed that such a course would end in disaster.

So an attack on French North Africa was proposed instead, which would clear the Axis powers from North Africa and improve naval control of the Mediterranean Sea, and prepare for an invasion of Southern Europe in 1943.
Debate Round No. 4
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by justindmack 2 years ago
justindmack
If the US had become completly neutral they would have been forced to stop trading completely with Britain due to unrestricted submarine warfare. Without US supplies 1. The British military would run out of fuel, planes, steel, etc. 2. The public would starve. Britain imported massive amounts of food from the US

In the face of this hopeless situation, I believe that Churchill would either be replaced or forced to sue for peace with Germany, allowing that final third of the German military to be used against the soviets. Additionally, the strategic bombing of Germany's industrial centers would stop, this would be very beneficial for them, to say the least.

However, even without British and American support (pro mentioned the massive amount of material sent the Russians) Russia would still have defeated Germany, it just would have been much harder and lasted longer. (I wonder how this wouldv'e effected the Cold War?)
Posted by TheRussian 3 years ago
TheRussian
It's alright, no problem :)
Posted by pariashi 3 years ago
pariashi
Omg.I am really sorry.
I had written the entire material on my clipboard and I guess there was a problem while I was copying that.
My apologies.
Posted by TheRussian 3 years ago
TheRussian
pariashi, why did you just put the exact same thing from the first round?
Posted by TheRussian 3 years ago
TheRussian
Perfect for pro or con?
Posted by ANONYMOUS2282 3 years ago
ANONYMOUS2282
whenever theres a debate about anything that i could debate on it is taken i would be perfect for this
Posted by Dynasty2468 3 years ago
Dynasty2468
Whenever there's a debate about war, it always get taken by someone else :/
Posted by pariashi 3 years ago
pariashi
Welcome.
Lets debate
Posted by TheRussian 3 years ago
TheRussian
thanks for accepting! :)
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Seeginomikata 3 years ago
Seeginomikata
TheRussianpariashiTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Let's see, the Allies, without the US, fought most of the war, including the hardest half, and turned the tide without direct American support. Pro points were very accurate and sources reliable. Con did not provide sufficient evidence to make me see a different possibility.