Who contributed the most in defeating the axis during WW2?

Posted by: triangle.128k

Vote
36 Total Votes
1

Soviet Union

The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics abbreviated to USSR and SU or shortened to the Soviet Union, was a Marxist–Leninist state on the Eurasian continent that existed between 1922 and 1991. It was governed as a single-party state by the Communist ... Party with Moscow as its capital. A union of multiple subnational Soviet republics, its government and economy were highly centralized.The Soviet Union had its roots in the Russian Revolution of 1917, which overthrew the Russian Empire. The Bolsheviks, the majority faction of the Social Democratic Labour Party, led by Vladimir Lenin, then led a second revolution which overthrew the provisional government and established the Russian Socialist Federative Soviet Republic, beginning a civil war between pro-revolution Reds and counter-revolution Whites. The Red Army entered several territories of the former Russian Empire, and helped local Communists take power through soviets that nominally acted on behalf of workers and peasants. In 1922, the Communists were victorious, forming the Soviet Union with the unification of the Russian, Transcaucasian, Ukrainian, and Byelorussian republics   more
24 votes
6 comments
2

United States of America

The United States of America, commonly referred to as the United States, America, and sometimes the States, is a federal republic consisting of 50 states and a federal district. The 48 contiguous states and Washington, D.C., are in central North Ame... rica between Canada and Mexico. The state of Alaska is the northwestern part of North America and the state of Hawaii is an archipelago in the mid-Pacific. The country also has five populated and nine unpopulated territories in the Pacific and the Caribbean. At 3.80 million square miles and with around 318 million people, the United States is the world's third- or fourth-largest country by total area and third-largest by population. It is one of the world's most ethnically diverse and multicultural nations, the product of large-scale immigration from many countries. The geography and climate of the United States is also extremely diverse, and it is home to a wide variety of wildlife.Paleo-Indians migrated from Eurasia to what is now the U.S. mainland around 15,000 years ago, with European colonization beginning in the 16th century. The United States emerged from 13 British colonies located along the Atlantic seaboard   more
8 votes
1 comment
3

British Empire

The British Empire comprised the dominions, colonies, protectorates, mandates and other territories ruled or administered by the United Kingdom. It originated with the overseas possessions and trading posts established by England between the late 16... th and early 18th centuries. At its height, it was the largest empire in history and, for over a century, was the foremost global power. By 1922 the British Empire held sway over about 458 million people, one-fifth of the world's population at the time. The empire covered more than 33,700,000 km², almost a quarter of the Earth's total land area. As a result, its political, legal, linguistic and cultural legacy is widespread. At the peak of its power, the phrase "the empire on which the sun never sets" was often used to describe the British Empire, because its expanse around the globe meant that the sun was always shining on at least one of its territories.During the Age of Discovery in the 15th and 16th centuries, Portugal and Spain pioneered European exploration of the globe, and in the process established large overseas empires   more
3 votes
0 comments
4

Republic of China

The Republic of China was the East Asian state that occupied the present-day territories of China, Mongolia and Taiwan at differing times between 1912 and 1949. As an era of Chinese history, it was preceded by the last imperial dynasty of China, the...  Qing dynasty and followed by the People's Republic of China. The government of the Republic of China now governs the island of Taiwan and minor islands surrounding it as well as numerous islands of the South China Sea, following the Republic's Kuomintang leaders retreat to the island of Taiwan after losing the Chinese Civil War against the communists, while the Communist Party of China founded the People's Republic of China on the mainland.The Republic's first president, Sun Yat-sen, served only briefly. His party, then led by Song Jiaoren, won a parliamentary election held in December 1912. However, army leaders of the Beiyang clique, led by President Yuan Shikai, retained control of the central government. After Yuan's death in 1916, local military leaders, or warlords, asserted autonomy   more
1 vote
0 comments
Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Vox_Veritas says2016-02-13T01:40:52.7965815Z
Spain
UtherPenguin says2016-02-13T01:43:11.2678649Z
Switzerland obviously
triangle.128k says2016-02-13T02:07:44.1417911Z
I'm pretty sure it was Sweden...
triangle.128k says2016-02-13T02:11:11.1239179Z
Lol @ the people voting for USA
Anonymous says2016-02-13T02:35:51.0898048Z
Really, it was more like the English and other Western powers. I will not be apart of another flame war.
triangle.128k says2016-02-13T02:39:20.7826605Z
@Sciguy the UK, USSR, and Republic of China fought longer and lost more troops than the USA.
Anonymous says2016-02-13T02:40:53.8253454Z
Edit: Russia.... Number.... One..... U....S...A.... No, more like U.S.S.R. Damn the Soviets and the Cold War!
Vox_Veritas says2016-02-13T02:51:01.2718213Z
The Soviets suffered the highest losses, but this is offset by their earlier allying with Nazi Germany(to the point where Nazi Germany might not have invaded Poland if the Soviet Union didn't partner with them to divide the country in half).
StephenColbert27 says2016-02-13T03:07:50.5729091Z
Seems like we could break this down a lot more. Materially, it's the USA. The United States ended up supplying most of the Western Powers as well as Russia and China through Lend-Lease. In terms of actual fighting, you could still break it down more. In Europe, clearly the Soviet Union did the most fighting. However, in the Pacific Theater, the Americans did most of the fighting on land and sea. At the end of the day, I have to go with the USSR, but I think it's a lot closer than people realize.
Anonymous says2016-02-13T03:12:26.4496730Z
Those of you that say, "over twenty-million dead Russians!" I say to you this. As an example lets say that I go to New York, New York and I start gunning down fifty-seven people and take my own life soon after. Does that mean those fifty-seven people contributed in my demise? The answer to this relevant and logical example is no, they had no contribution at all to the success of my evil self and demise. This correlates directly to the Russians, just because you had a large population and a percentage of it is killed by soldiers from a foreign country and being nearly eradicated entirely and, sadly saved, due to poor leadership does not mean that you were the bigger country giving the bigger part to the war effort.
PHlLOSOPHER says2016-02-13T04:43:36.9789215Z
Hitler did. He wasn't just evil, but was also stupid to the point where he attacked all countries around him basically signing a death warrant for his own movement. Hitler was stupid in strategic terms, even his own generals wanted him dead for such stupidity.
StarCraft says2016-02-13T05:16:29.0410859Z
The Soviets killed a many more axis troops than any other nation. They lost many more people in the process yes, but it is the number of dead Germans on the eastern front that proves it was the USSR and not the west who contributed the most to defeating the Axis.
greatkitteh says2016-02-13T05:50:41.3679420Z
The Russian side always pummels the US side during a WW2 who was better debate, from what I saw. But Russia sucked in World war one.
triangle.128k says2016-02-13T06:08:03.4234218Z
@greatkitteh Just wondering, but why'd you choose China?
greatkitteh says2016-02-15T08:32:06.4734995Z
Japan would have enough troops to deal with the USA if China didn't hold them off. Or, Japan could have used the Half a million men + Manchukko to invade the USSR from the east, tieing up reinforcements that were so crucial in the battle of Moscow and stalingrad. And after Moscow fell, The german army could have captured and killed Stalin, which would effectively end the Ussr morale and goverment. Also, By China not surrendering, Japan was effectively out of resources to fight the USA .
58539672 says2016-02-15T17:07:06.2276503Z
@greatkitteh Japans army was irrelevant when it came to fighting the US. It was the Navies of both nations which determined the victory, and the US had the ability to replace lost ships quickly while Japan did not. Japan's defeat was inevitable after their fleet was destroyed at Midway and its following battles.
BobthePlumberDude says2016-02-15T20:49:51.5085383Z
I'd argue that because Brnito Mussolini's failed African conquests in Africa required Hitler to spread very needed forces too thin, Benito Mussolini helped more than every country with the sole exception of the Soviet Union. They would've mopped the Germans up regardless of Western efforts imo.
58539672 says2016-02-15T22:57:52.4732580Z
@BobthePlumberDude The Germans were a hairs breath away from conquering Moscow in our timeline. If they didn't have their forces thinned by the African campaigns like you said, then it is entirely possible they could have taken the city before winter arrived. Russia would have lost another world war.
StarCraft says2016-02-17T00:06:41.1535964Z
Yes this is true but nevertheless, a couple thousand men in Africa is nothing compared for the 3-4 million Germany had on the eastern front. Lions share of the credit goes to the Soviets.
58539672 says2016-02-17T01:07:41.4130468Z
@StarCraft Africa was already lost by the time the soviet invasion began. Most of the forces stationed there were moved to Italy and the Balkans. The disparity is far greater than that however. By winter of 1942 when the Russians managed to stop the German offensive and started to turn the tide of the war, the German Wehrmacht was between 6 and 7 million soldiers strong, of which only 4 million were on the eastern front. The rest were scattered throughout Europe, with a clean 1.3 million on the western front alone and another million from the remnants of the African campaign (Italy and the Balkans). Given how close the Germans got to winning in our timeline, an additional million soldiers can go along way.
StarCraft says2016-02-17T02:20:32.7839530Z
The Germans were finally pushed out of Africa in 1943. Barbarossa began in 1941 therefore I don't understand this first statement. As for the statistics you present, they are irrelevant to this poll. What matters is the number of Germans engaging the Western Allies and the number of Germans on the Eastern Front. Like I pointed out before, 4 million were fighting the Soviets and a few hundred thousand Germans were in Africa. There was no "western front" until 1944 by which the tide of the war was already turned and the outcome favoring the allies. Heads up, 4 million axis troops started Barbarossa in 1941 but as the Germans suffered huge losses more troops were pulled in from other parts of Europe.
58539672 says2016-02-17T04:18:33.6697982Z
@StarCraft The western front started in 1940 with the invasion of France, Belgium, and the Netherlands and lasted till the end of the war. All the troops stationed there as of 1942 were an occupying force. | All of the troops and supplies of the North African Campaign originated from forces stationed in Italy and the Balkans, where most of their manpower for the campaigns existed in 1942 (see earlier post for number estimates). | This conversation thread doesn't have much relevance in the way of the poll, but I never said it did. This was a discussion that began with BobthePlumberDude comment on Italian incompetence in N. Africa and my agreement and additional statement that given the closeness of the eastern front at the time, the forces dedicated to the N. Africa campaign (which included ALL forces relating to the Mediterranean and Middle Eastern Theater) could have changed the outcome of the theater. You said that a few hundred thousand soldiers wouldn't make a difference, for which I replied the number is actually around a million, which could definitely have made a difference in 1942. | I also didn't say their were only 4 million Germans that fought in the east. I said their were 4 million Germans in the east in 1942, which was the hight of there campaign.
greatkitteh says2016-02-22T10:03:06.9990967Z
Armies were crucial in certain battles at the pacific front and 500,000 men could have better garrisoned the Islands. Or, if the Armies WERE irrelevant, then Japan would have been able to attack the soviet union. (The Soviet Union was very scared of a Japanese attack, which is why operation zet was used to keep japan tied up in China). If Japan attacked the soviet union, than the soviet union would not be able to draw up it's reserves for Stalingrad and Moscow. Without reinforcements, Stalingrad would be captured with the 6th army intact and Moscow would likely fall. And if the Soviet Union falls, Africa and Normandy would be harder to man, and the western front would be more fightable.
58539672 says2016-02-22T15:09:33.1469243Z
@greatkitteh" Japans army was irrelevant when it came to fighting the US". Bringing up points about the Japanese and the USSR does not dispute my point. The US Navy's strategy of island hopping meant that any island that was to heavily fortified would simply be bombarded with artillery (the number one killer in most wars) until any forces remaining could be dispatched with a little more ease. If the fortification were still to strong after that, then the Navy would isolate the island, preventing any reinforcements from arriving, and hop over to the next island. The only exceptions to this rule were areas of great strategic importance like airfields. Without a navy (which was destroyed) the Japanese couldn't bring reinforcements and supplies to their forces on their islands, meaning that the defeat of each of these islands forces by the US was simply a matter of time and attrition (the US can bring up reinforcements and supplies if needed). Even if Japan did everything you said it could and defeated the USSR, they still would have lost to the US. The fate of their maritime empire was sealed after Midway.
SomeGuyWhoIsCool says2016-08-27T18:04:27.6725594Z
The British and Soviets did much more to defeat the Nazis than America.

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.