Who contributed more to defeating the Axis, the Soviet Union or United States?

Posted by: RussiaPutinBest

  • Soviet Union

  • United States of America

68% 15 votes
32% 7 votes
  • The USSR lost the most troops and killed the most German troops. They destoyed most of the german tanks and even took the capital city of Berlin. The USSR also attacked Japan which put one of the final nails in the coffin of Japanese expansionism.

  • Why are there so many of these polls nowadays but NOBODY WANTS TO DEBATE? *sigh*

  • Nazis got rekt by Zhukov, Freaking n00bz.

  • It's a given

  • this is just a fact, no patriotic bias

  • First of all, America joined in WW2 in 1941 but WW2 started in 1939 (2 years later). So the soviets was by themselves with the British for 2 years. America join in next. Yes, america helped but Russia had the most casualties up to almost 6,000,000 soldiers. Now I'm not saying america didn't do anything in WW2, Im saying that russia started earlier and they killed most of the German troops.

  • Russia killed more Germans than all the other Allied nations combined times 5, killed the most German tanks, held the eastern front almost by itself, took Berlin, etc. The U.S. didn't even enter the war until much later than Russia. The U.S. clearly played a crucial role in the War, but the guys in the other column verbally licking their 'Murica-induced boners are engaging in a thoroughly unwarranted gesticulation.

  • Russia does take the cake for having lost the most lives. Thats about the only thing they dominated at.

  • The U.S. opened the sea routes into northern Russia and supplied the Soviet military with food, water, and weapons to fight back against German armies. Not only did the U.S. supply the Red Army, but it was U.S. bombers that leveled most of Germany's infrastructure (power plants, factories, refineries, etc.). American soldiers lead the entire advance through Europe, Africa, and the German Fatherland itself. The Soviets only were able to storm and take the Reichstag with support from American artillery and armored cavalry (tanks and other armored vehicles). And for anyone who doesn't know history too well, the Soviet Union was allied with Germany in 1939. Stalin himself ended the alliance and Hitler nearly took the Soviet Union in less than six weeks. Hitler's plan only failed due to American intervention.

  • Casualties is not the best way to determine contribution size. Having the most dead could be taken as having faulty military strategies or just simple incompetence. The US fought ALL the axis powers, made significant and major accomplishments to their defeat, and did it with less casualties than the Russians.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
RussiaPutinBest says2015-08-04T19:18:58.3718715Z
If you kept the debate open long enough somebody might accept. You should try again.
Vox_Veritas says2015-08-04T19:58:13.2286518Z
The Russians certainly sacrificed the most, but sacrifice alone doesn't make one side more useful. The United States was more useful to the war effort, singlehandedly taking down Japan (Russian declaration of War against Japan in the very last days of the war doesn't count at all) and giving the Allies the manpower and equipment needed to take back Europe. The Allies might have possibly won in the event of a neutral USSR (in the war's earliest days Russia actually helped the Axis Powers), but there probably would've been no victory without the United States.
RussiaPutinBest says2015-08-04T20:16:52.0929388Z
America didn't singlehandedly defeat Japan. China was fighting Japan since 1937 (four years before America joined the war) and Japan had to keep many divisions there. Also, British/Indian troops defeated Japan in the Siam front. The Soviet Union contributed greatly as well. Also, the USSR contributed greatly to the war against Japan forcing Japan to keep hundreds of thousands of troops in Manchuria throughout the war as well as defeating Japan in the 1930's border war. Also, the Soviet invasion of Manchuria may have contributed as much, if not more to Japan's decision to surrender than the atomic bombs. Also, US lend lease supplies made up around 15% of total Soviet production. The Soviet Union also contributed some 25 million troops to the war effort compared to the 11 million American troops, of which the majority were in the pacific.
komododragon8 says2015-08-04T20:32:35.4621860Z
Freedom: the USSR killed the most German troops in fact it is estimated that 8 out of every 10 german military deaths occurred on the Eastern front. Also the eastern front saw the largest tank battle in all of history which undoubtedly took a huge chunk out of german armored forces. Vox: Saying that Amcerica singlehandedly defeated Japan is extremely offensive to the millions of soldiers from China, India, England along with many other nations, who died fighting one of the most ruthless armies to ever walk the earth.
tajshar2k says2015-08-04T22:49:08.0479874Z
I do not like giving the USSR credit. Nobody ever mentions they helped the Nazis in the early days of the war. Only because Hitler decided to betray them, they went on and joined the Allies. They never were the "good" guy. More like an Anti-Hero.
RussiaPutinBest says2015-08-05T04:37:17.7539181Z
Oh, the USSR was allied with Czechoslovakia. As were Britain and France. Do you remember what happened to it in 1938? France and Britain agreed to split the country giving Germany most of it. Poland and Romania got chunks of the country as well. The Soviet Union never agreed to any of this. Czechoslovakia was the first victim of WWII, not Poland.
RussiaPutinBest says2015-08-05T04:41:11.9582194Z
Poland and Hungary, I meant to say.
stargate says2015-08-05T12:34:04.3254963Z
The soviets would had fallen if we didn't help them.
58539672 says2015-08-05T16:44:32.5337651Z
The Japanese were largely defeated by the US. We destroyed their fleets and reconquered their territory. Others fought in the Pacific theater, but it wasnt until the US joined that the Japanese were pushed back. The Japanese navy even drove the Royal navy out of the Indian Ocean in 1942, of which they would not return in sufficient until 1944 after the US Operation Transom. And as for the USSR's contribution, well, it is almost nonexistent. They did not join the fighting until a few days before the war ended, and any conflict they did fight was in one of Japan's distant territories. The Japanese Prime Minister was even asked after the war which, in his opinion, was more of a threat... The USSR invasion or the atomic bombs. He said the Bombs because Russia, though a serious threat, invaded a distant territory and would have to fight its way to the Japanese mainland. The US were already killing us in our own homes. They were the more immediate threat. Even if you give joint credit to both the bombs and the invasion by Russia, it still wouldnt have mattered in the end anyway. Some form of Japanese surrender was inevitable after the US navy wiped out the Imperial navy at Midway and its following battles. The invasion and the bombs just speed the process along.
58539672 says2015-08-05T17:07:06.2245078Z
As for the European theater (specifically the eastern front), if people are going to use the "the US didnt defeat Japan alone" argument, then Im going to bring up the fact that the USSR was not the only force fighting the Germans in eastern Europe. Finland, Poland, and several other allies contributed to the fighting. And as for the Russians killing 8 out of every 10 Germans, let me also bring up that for every 1 German killed, between 2 and 3 Russians were killed. The Russian military tactic was to find an enemy and charge at it until they died, which is more of a show of their unimaginative nature. It also creates heavier casualty rates. Russian victory has more to do with their willingness to send their own men into a meat grinder than any tactical or military advantage. Also, despite the suicidal effort, Russian winter, and anything else that the Germans had going against them, German forces got within 10 miles of Moscow. If the Japanese had not attacked the US at around the same time, bringing the US fully into the war and extending the Lend Lease which had saved the British in the past to Russia, Moscow may have fallen. Plus if the US never joined the war, operations like D-Day would have been impossible. No mass Allied invasion from the west would have freed up the Germans to send additional forces eastward, further supporting an occupation of Moscow. US involvement in the war was a lucky break for the Russian forces.
RussiaPutinBest says2015-08-05T19:56:33.6771106Z
8/10 Germans died on the eastern front, 2/10 can be divided up between the British Empire, America, and all the other countries fighting Germany in the west. Thats about 1/10 for America.
58539672 says2015-08-05T23:06:45.2389552Z
Is that the only part you have to counter? Ill give you that. The USSR played a key role in defeating Nazi Germany. Ill even go on to say that they played the largest role in that theater. But they did not play the largest role in defeating the Axis Powers. Not all of them anyway.
RussiaPutinBest says2015-08-06T03:36:02.2377694Z
I don't wish to write as much as you. We have debates for that. My opinion is that the USSR contributed no less to defeating the axis powers than the United States did. For a start, you must remember that China started fighting Japan in 1937 and huge amounts of Japanese soldiers were fighting there throughout the war. Although China didn't do very well, they inflicted hundreds of thousands of casualties on the Japanese. Britain fought Japan in Burma and Siam. There is no way to prove that America almost singlehandedly defeated the Japanese, because they didn't. To conclude, the Soviet Union and China did about as much on the Pacific theater as America did in the European theater. Therefore it is impossible for you to prove that America played a greater role in defeating the axis than the Soviet Union.
58539672 says2015-08-06T05:03:39.6216552Z
Very well. Lets say that Russia's victory against Germany were equal to Americas victory against Japan. That still leaves out Italy. Russia did not contribute anything to the fighting in Northern Africa or on the Italian peninsula. Most of the contributions were from the UK and US. So we will give the US half a point in that one. So, between the three major axis powers defeated, we have UK- .5, Russia-1, US-1.5.
PericIes says2015-08-06T05:09:21.2384602Z
Except Russia's victory over Germany was not equal to the U.S.'s victory over Japan.
PericIes says2015-08-06T05:11:03.6531167Z
Russia's was greater. Russia was in it for longer, they sacrificed more, they inflicted more casualties, and they had less help on their front.
RussiaPutinBest says2015-08-06T05:51:00.0780783Z
Italy suffered around 80,000 casualties on the eastern front. Also, it was the fact that Russia tied down Germany that even allowed for Italy to be defeated. And just so you know, Britain contributed more to defeating Italy.
58539672 says2015-08-06T05:53:11.5811061Z
Russia was in the war for 5 months longer than the US. Remember when Russia was an ally to the Axis? Well Germany invaded them (turning them over to the allies) in June 1941. Pearl Harbor happened in December 1941. That "the US came in later in the war" argument applies just as much to Russia as it does the US. The Sacrificing more argument can be answered in my above post and comments. And Russia got A LOT of help. First off, they received supplies under the Lend Lease Act by the US, had troops taken away from the eastern front by the US and UK advances in western Europe and Italy, and had the added advantage of Hitlers bad military decisions.
58539672 says2015-08-06T05:57:05.3232196Z
You can say that the UK did more than the US in Italy, but it is still more than what Russia did. My statement still stands.
RussiaPutinBest says2015-08-06T06:28:03.2483293Z
5 months in a war that lasted only 6 years is a significant amount of time. Perhaps the war in Africa and later Italy did force Germany to send some troops elsewhere, but most of the German troops were still fighting Russia. Also, paying Russia to do the fighting for America isn't a very strong argument. 15% of total Soviet production was made up by American lend lease so its still a minority. Russia destroyed the major German offenses and by the time D-Day even happened it was clear Germany had no chance of winning the war.
PericIes says2015-08-06T07:15:10.5890380Z
@guy with the numbers for the name: "Russia was in the war for 5 months longer than the US." No, it was fighting Germany for five months longer. Actually, it took the U.S. a bit to actually get around to active combat against Germany, so what should really be said is that Russia had declared war on Germany five months earlier, even though they had been in the war for longer. "Remember when Russia was an ally to the Axis?" Yeah, you seem to have conveniently forgotten that bit in your last sentence. "That 'the US came in later in the war' argument applies just as much to Russia as it does the US." No it doesn't. You literally just agreed that Russia was in for nearly half a year longer than the U.S. "The Sacrificing more argument can be answered in my above post and comments." The faulty ones, yes. "And Russia got A LOT of help." I never said they didn't. I said they got less help than the U.S. Which they did. "...Had troops taken away from the eastern front by the US and UK advances in western Europe and Italy..." There were still more troops on the eastern front. "...Had the added advantage of Hitlers bad military decisions." So did literally every other nation fighting Germany. Your argument is a gigantic fallacy.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-08-06T19:07:04.0554846Z
Everyone contributed sure ... Russia just had the worst mortality rate and did their contribution the worst of all. Do they count how many russians died to their fellow comarades as german kills or russian kills I wonder? Im sure they'd like to claim their own retreating forces as german defectors ... That probably boosts their numbers a bit dont you think?
RussiaPutinBest says2015-08-06T19:12:11.3774546Z
That entire statement doesn't make sense...
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-08-06T19:16:31.2907207Z
It doesnt make sense? Russians killed their own retreating forces as having disobeyed orders to charge. They claim people who disobey orders to be defectors to the german side ... Slaughter them (theyre mostly unarmed or not expecting friendly fire) ... Then say they just killed more german troops. Clever of them ...
RussiaPutinBest says2015-08-06T19:18:59.7830748Z
Around 3.6 million Soviets died in German POW camps alone. Sure, Russians killed their own people but it was the Germans who did that mostly.
komododragon8 says2015-08-06T19:22:49.8689497Z
Freedom: While russian causualties due to being shot by their own men are high, it doesnt hold a candle to the total number of germans killed by Russian forces. Again let me be clear- it is estimated that 8 out of every 10 german casualties occured on the Eastern Front. That isnt even counting Italian or Romanian forces. Also number of Russians killed doesnt really relate to this poll as it is about who contributed most to defeating the Axis, not who lost the most defeating the Axis.
komododragon8 says2015-08-06T19:23:14.2987063Z
Freedom: While russian causualties due to being shot by their own men are high, it doesnt hold a candle to the total number of germans killed by Russian forces. Again let me be clear- it is estimated that 8 out of every 10 german casualties occured on the Eastern Front. That isnt even counting Italian or Romanian forces. Also number of Russians killed doesnt really relate to this poll as it is about who contributed most to defeating the Axis, not who lost the most defeating the Axis.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-08-07T15:31:34.8930510Z
We don't know that to be certain. I think you could even make the case that sending a Russian soldier out to the front lines without a rifle in hopes of picking one up off the dead, that that was a form of killing their own troops as well. If anyone tries to make a case for casualties being a positive factor towards calculating someones contribution to the war effort, those pieces need to be known. Their leadership was abhorrent and responsible for the bulk of their own deaths.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-08-07T15:34:44.6370673Z
You can say overall German deaths ... But to look at kill ratios of the Germans versus the Russians ... The Germans won hands down. Had they not been fighting two fronts ... There wouldnt have been one Russian left today.
RussiaPutinBest says2015-08-07T16:31:27.3013635Z
The Soviet Union was up against a much larger amount of men than the United States. Also, the massive casualties for the Red Army were during the first months of the war. Then, the Red Army was responsible for victories at Stalingrad and Kursk as the tide began to turn.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-08-07T18:29:58.0257067Z
Much larger force minus the fact that we didnt even have ground to put our feet on at the start of our front. The russians at least began their war in their homelands with clear lines of supply ... And as they gained ground it was in liberating their own cities back. The American front was fought having to air drop or make amphibious landing just to have a presence there. A smaller force of germans in a much more defensible region, a harder enemy to fight all round.
komododragon8 says2015-08-07T18:55:03.2989939Z
Freedom: Again we are not discussing Allied casualties but instead German, Italian, and Japanese losses. US, British, and Russian soldiers fought with equal bravery but overall, more German tanks were destroyed on the Eastern Front, more fighters were shot down, and more german soldiers were killed. The idea that Russians had it easy compared to the US is offensive to the many veterans who served on the Eastern Front, the war was hard for all of them and theres no way you can objective say that US soldiers fought more bravely or had a more difficult time than their Soviet counterparts.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-08-07T19:11:59.9534728Z
I can say objectively that had we not entered the war ... Russia would not have killed 8/10ths of the German fighting force AND would in fact have lost the war entirely. That much is certain. Germany had no navy in place to take the fight to the US ... So I think I can say for certain that allied entry into the war was key to the axis losing.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-08-07T19:13:12.6343387Z
Had they held their western front uncontested ... Russian kill ratios would have been far far worse. They were already lower than that of the germans even though the germans lost!
komododragon8 says2015-08-07T19:27:14.4625350Z
How do you know that Russia would have definetively lost, do you have a machine which can take you to alternative universes? While the war would have taken longer and more people would have died there is no garentee the German would have won had the US never joined.
RussiaPutinBest says2015-08-07T20:48:27.2317705Z
That is too true. American supplies probably had more of an effect on the outcome of the European theater than American manpower. America helped defeat the Germans in Africa, but it was Britain who really did it, and they wouldn't have lost without American troops (although maybe they wouldn't have won either).
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-08-10T14:35:42.8514929Z
How do you know that Russia would have definetively lost, do you have a machine which can take you to alternative universes? All you have to do is look at the kill ratios to make that projection. Take away the loss ratios of the nations you want to say did not jump in, add those losses to the russian side and check that rate against their populations again. In fact those rates are even worse when translated to russia because of the russian leadership. Whatever our losses were as british and american allies ... They would have been some 30%+ higher had that effort against the brits and americans had been focused on russia. Thats not including the fact that Japan's entry into the war would have been directed there also. I can imagine russia spread thin at the polish front and then getting backdoored by japan pretty easily. Then theres the fact that Germany was mere months away from having superweapons of their own. Had the war not ended so quickly ... Due to russians only being the ones fighting ... They might have had been the first nation to have a nuclear weapon used on them instead of Japan.

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.