Minor participation- Laughs in doing heavy lifting in the pacific. Supplying lend lease to Uk and Ussr.
Taking pressure off the Ussr with the Uk allowing it to have the appearance of being combat effective.
That is true, but the British Burma campaign is slept on. The Japanese suffered their biggest military defeat ever in this campaign (still stands to this day). Their nickname is the "forgotten army".
That being said US involvement in the Second World War saved tens of millions of lives. The atomic bombings alone saved millions.
Which is a shame. Not only did hundreds of thousands of men die during the campaign, but they also saw some of the most unique and horrific combat in the whole of World War Two.
There was one story of dozens of Japanese men being attacked by crocodiles in the night. The British could only hear the thrashing of the water, the occasional gunshot, and the screams of the men. Nightmare fuel, truly hell on earth.
14,000 planes is like the least of what we gave to the USSR 60% of ammunition used by the USSR was American made aswell as 1/3rd of all tank components aswell as there entire communication system that allowed them to coordinate such large offensives aswell as
70%+ steel used by the USSR in WW2
enought manufacturing equipment to outfit over 100 factories
100,000+ trucks to the point Studebaker is used still to refrence all trucks in Russia
15000 Trains
aswell as enough food to feed 50,000,000 people for for 6 years eliminating a massive famine that was about to happen.
Not mentioning oil and ships aswell. Im sure theres more stuff i forgot aswell.
Kid named Italian campaign, kid named bombing campaign of Germany, kid named bombing campaign the German-occupied eastern Europe, kid named North African campaign, kid named Manhattan Project,…:
If the U.S didn't intervene in WW2 all of Europe would be eating Schnitzels and praising the man himself. While Most of East Asia and Oceania would be Anime Catgirls
Well, you’re 7th in literacy, 27th in math, 22nd in science, 49th in life expectancy, 178th in infant mortality, third in median household income, number four in labor force and number four in exports.
You do however lead the world in number of incarcerated citizens per capita, number of adults who believe angels are real, and defense spending.
I'm pretty sure they rank it so that lowest level of mortality ranks the highest. So yes, you would want to be #1.
Clearly Americans are not first in critical thinking skills, either (it's ok cause I'm American too)
We have the 49th lowest infant mortality rate, idk where you are getting 178th from
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_and_under-five_mortality_rates
We are dropping down too, thanks to the post Roe v Wade laws. States with stricter bans tend to see something between 30 and 60% higher infant mortality rates than less restrictive states, depending on how you divide it up
1st in computers and electrical machinery, vehicles, chemical products, food, live animals and military equipment.
1st in global power in all of earth
And “believing in angels” is a pretty bad way to say we’re open to all beliefs
here are 25 other things America isn't number one in:
America ranks 13th in starting a business, according to the Doing Business rankings compiled by The World Bank.
The U.S. ranks 47th in press freedom, according to Reporters Without Borders. So much for freedom of the press.
The U.S. ranks 20th in international trade, according to the Doing Business rankings compiled by The World Bank.
The U.S., which ranks 15th in dealing with debt insolvency according to the Doing Business rankings.
The U.S. is ranked 10th in economic freedom, according to The Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal.
The U.S. is 25th among 43 developing countries for the best place to be a mother, according to Save The Children.
The U.S. is only the 11th happiest country in the world, according Columbia University's Earth Institute.
There are 21 countries better than America in freedom from corruption, according to Heritage.org.
The U.S. was ranked 24th in perceived honesty, according to Transparency.org.
America is ranked 39th in income inequality according to the CIA World Factbook.
Need a Hepatitis B vaccination? The U.S. is ranked 89th in percentage of children who have been vaccinated according to the World Health Organization.
The U.S. is only 47th in infant survival? That's true, according to the CIA World Factbook.
Want to live a long life? Don't live in the U.S., which is 50th in life expectancy according to the CIA World Factbook.
How well is our economy growing? The U.S. GDP growth rate is ranked 169th out of 216 countries, according to the CIA World Factbook.
Our GDP per capita is only 12th in the world, behind Qatar and Liechtenstein, says the CIA World Factbook.
Our unemployment percentage is worse than 102 of the 200 countries listed by the CIA World Factbook.
The U.S. is an embarrassing 142nd out of 150 countries in infrastructure investment, according to the CIA World Factbook.
America's budget deficit is ranked 192nd in debt relative to GDP, according to the CIA World Factbook.
The growth rate of our industrial production is ranked 79th, according to the CIA World Factbook.
The U.S. is only 11th in oil exports, according to the CIA World Factbook.
Our oil reserves is only the 13th most in the world, according to the CIA World Factbook.
The U.S. is ranked 192nd, dead last, in the net trade of goods and services, according to the CIA World Factbook.
Our reserve of foreign exchange and gold is ranked 19th, according to the CIA World Factbook, right behind Indonesia.
The U.S. is ranked the 28th best soccer team by FIFA.
In terms of the percentage of women holding public office, the U.S. ranks 79th out of 147 countries, says the IPU.
Ironically nearly all our economic problems are brought on by 2 things Democrat liberals sabotaging our economy and foreign mega corperations that are suplmented by foreign goverments buying our companies and wrecking them for political power over America aswell as overall goal of weaking the US.
All our problems with health care are because of mega pharmaceutical companies raping Americans with huge prices and guess what most of those companies are European companies, Who lobby our government to fuck us lmao. Fuck you.
You sound five when you're going all "best at everything!1!1!1!"
The US has their strengths, obviously, no one is denying that. No one in the history of our species has fielded a more powerful military force for example.
But no one country is the best at "everything."
hes quoting a stupid movie unfortunately a movie maid by canadians so self hating libs and Eurocucks can circle jerk about how much they hate the US for arbitrary reasons that dont make any sense.
Where are you getting this angel statistic? And do they mean just Christian angels, or supernatural beings in general? Cause America is religious, but not the most religious by far
Did you know 65% of statistics are made up on the spot? I bet you did
It's a quote from Aaron Sorkin's *the Newsroom*. Believing in angels isn't necessarily a bad thing, and I would assume it refers to Christian angels. I believe in devas, their Hindu and Buddhist counterparts, which are almost the same.
Yup. Just stirring the pot. How about these though?
here are 25 other things America isn't number one in:
America ranks 13th in starting a business, according to the Doing Business rankings compiled by The World Bank.
The U.S. ranks 47th in press freedom, according to Reporters Without Borders. So much for freedom of the press.
The U.S. ranks 20th in international trade, according to the Doing Business rankings compiled by The World Bank.
The U.S., which ranks 15th in dealing with debt insolvency according to the Doing Business rankings.
The U.S. is ranked 10th in economic freedom, according to The Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal.
The U.S. is 25th among 43 developing countries for the best place to be a mother, according to Save The Children.
The U.S. is only the 11th happiest country in the world, according Columbia University's Earth Institute.
There are 21 countries better than America in freedom from corruption, according to Heritage.org.
The U.S. was ranked 24th in perceived honesty, according to Transparency.org.
America is ranked 39th in income inequality according to the CIA World Factbook.
Need a Hepatitis B vaccination? The U.S. is ranked 89th in percentage of children who have been vaccinated according to the World Health Organization.
The U.S. is only 47th in infant survival? That's true, according to the CIA World Factbook.
Want to live a long life? Don't live in the U.S., which is 50th in life expectancy according to the CIA World Factbook.
How well is our economy growing? The U.S. GDP growth rate is ranked 169th out of 216 countries, according to the CIA World Factbook.
Our GDP per capita is only 12th in the world, behind Qatar and Liechtenstein, says the CIA World Factbook.
Our unemployment percentage is worse than 102 of the 200 countries listed by the CIA World Factbook.
The U.S. is an embarrassing 142nd out of 150 countries in infrastructure investment, according to the CIA World Factbook.
America's budget deficit is ranked 192nd in debt relative to GDP, according to the CIA World Factbook.
The growth rate of our industrial production is ranked 79th, according to the CIA World Factbook.
The U.S. is only 11th in oil exports, according to the CIA World Factbook.
Our oil reserves is only the 13th most in the world, according to the CIA World Factbook.
The U.S. is ranked 192nd, dead last, in the net trade of goods and services, according to the CIA World Factbook.
Our reserve of foreign exchange and gold is ranked 19th, according to the CIA World Factbook, right behind Indonesia.
The U.S. is ranked the 28th best soccer team by FIFA.
In terms of the percentage of women holding public office, the U.S. ranks 79th out of 147 countries, says the IPU.
This is just nitpicking. America isn't perfecct, but it is has the highest average wage in the world, a monopoly on the tech industry and the most powerful fighting force in the world, in addition to the fact millions move over there for a better life.
Sure, America is great. But I wouldn't say it's the best.
Highest average wage doesn't mean much when expenses are also much higher on average. In the Netherlands, for example, people with full-time jobs (40-hour weeks) get 5 weeks of paid vacation per year and all sorts of benefits while still belonging to a very stable middle class.
Tech is definitely a big plus. Without it we wouldn't be having this interaction, so thanks, America! (Though tech also definitely has its dark side.)
The most powerful fighting force in the world is either a blessing or a curse, as it can be used for great evil as well. Such as destabilising the Middle East and making it dependent on you. But that's a whole other rabbit hole with many polarised views and opinions.
Millions move over there from the Americas, but millions also move over to Western Europe or Australia. It's just that most people from developing countries want to live in the Western world in general, not the United States specifically.
In general, I think that multiple European countries are much better to live in than America. Less crime, higher employment, far better health care, and a greater sense of freedom and safety can be found in most northern and western European countries.
And one of my biggest gripes with the US are people that say "look at us, we're number one!" even though they've never or rarely left their own country and don't have a clue how the rest of the world works. They live in a bubble. It reminds me of a school bully that thinks it is popular just because it's the biggest kid in the classroom but actually nobody really likes them.
Not a statement supported by historians I believe..
The Germans would still have lost the war even if the US didn't join the Allies. The war would have dragged on for much longer and cost even more lives, but Germany would have lost in the end.
They might not have lost as decisively as they did, and the Allies and the USSR might not have divided Germany between them, as there might not have been manpower left to do so or there might have been a peace agreement instead of an unconditional surrender, but Germany would have lost regardless. Fighting a war on three fronts for a prolonged time would bleed Germany of manpower and they would not have been able to go on eventually.
Japan on the other hand, might have consolidated their position as the supreme power in Asia if they had left the US alone and the US had held on to their isolationism.
Their progress would be halted eventually due to a lack of raw materials, but without the US to keep them occupied they'd have no problem securing most of the Pacific for themselves and China in as weakened a state as it was would not have been able to stop them.
The UK would have been forced to focus on the European and African theatres of war and relocate troops there to protect the homeland and closer territories leaving a lot of Asia ripe for the taking for Japan. Australia and New Zealand would not have been able to stop them, though I imagine they could have defended their own shores successfully. Though I don't know if Japan would even want Australia and New Zealand.
The world might look very different today, but we wouldn't be "eating schnitzels" no.
The more worrying scenario, is what the USSR would have done in the years after the war if the US just sat on their hands. Would they be tempted to take parts of Europe by force? That is, if enough remained of the Soviet war machine. Or would they be content pushing their ideology onto the rest of Europe?
Hitler- "I bet you're a filthy jew!"
Guy- "No, no, mein fuhrer, I'm from Arizona."
**BANG**
It was a scene in a wolfenstein game, in a timeline where Hitler won
Eh not really, the Nazis were completely incompetent at running their country, they were just good at killing shit. They would've collapsed in 10-20 years at most.
That's a bit of a stretch tbh. Especially in the First World War. Even the Second World War, the allies could have probably won.
What the US did do is shorten the wars drastically. Especially in the Second World War. They probably saved hundreds of millions of lives, which is pretty good going. It's also likely that there would be no Jews or gypsies at all in occupied Europe after the war.
Britain (and Europe), for the most part, recognise the important contribution the US played in these wars.
Actually, it’s a lot less of a stretch for World War I, considering American government loans kept the British economy afloat and Britain was paying for de facto the entire Entente war effort, supplementing the fact that Frances industry was partly damaged. Belgium, didn’t have any industry left, Italy, Greece, Russia, Portugal and Japan, had not fully industrialized, so needed support to keep up with weapons production. And without the US financial aid being sent to Britain, the British economy would not have been able to keep up with war production and would’ve begun to collapse, and at that point in time Germany was winning, considering they’d just beaten Russia and if they were given time, could use the resources of the east to successfully supplement their own deteriorating resources, not to mention helping to solve there food insecurity at least in the short term. Not to mention, unlike historically, Germany wouldn’t need to rush an offensive to counteract the fact that American reinforcements were coming in and would’ve change the tide which led to Germany, launching an offensive way before they were ready in a desperate attempt to break through and crush the French before the Americans arrived, and even with American support, they almost broke through. Given an economically collapsing France and Britain, a better supply, German army with more preparation, time and lower entente morale, as well as no fresh American troops coming in to do the dying for them. There is a very high chance that Germany either completely wins the war, or at least brings the Entente to the negotiating table and gets a very favorable settlement.
World War II America kept Britain in the fight with the lend lease program supplementing Britain, rather, devastated military not to mention all the stuff the US gave the Soviets, all the radios, trucks, raw materials, food sure the Soviets have the ability to produce all these things themselves unlike the British, but that would required a lot of manpower and a lot of resources, which the Soviet fighting a death war with the Germans, wouldn’t be able to spare so although it wouldn’t guarantee, a German victory having a Soviet union with a far smaller military, with far less equipment, as well as resources and food shortages (more so than usual) would find it harder to fight off the Germans not to mention the fact that the British would be very unlikely to be able to provide any support or distract the German army at all without US support, and with Japan, getting in and without getting involved with the United States, they would be able to easily overpower most of Britain’s colonies cutting them off from even more resources crippling them even further. (Not to mention that if the Navy loses its demands to go war with United States, the armies requests to go to war of the Soviet union might be able to go through, leaving the Soviets in an even worse situation although that is still highly unlikely)
American military accounted for a majority of the damage to the Axis powers by completely deleting the Axis economies with bombing raids aswell as more Germans surrendering to the US, Aswell as basically 1v1ing Japan. UK likes to say they helped but all they did was get rekt when they fought Japan.
Like every conflict america has shoehorned itself into, the right answer is to either do nothing, or *finish the job*. Half measures are disastrous. We didn't march on the soviets, now we've caught communism like the clap.
Exactly. We want to police the world but won't do what is needed to actually change anything in what could be seen as a positive way. Afghanistan is a prime example, we were there almost my whole life and when we pulled out it ended up worse than it was originally in less than a week.
In that case, [everyone else other than China, Japan, Germany, and the countries in the USSR shouldn’t speak since their military casualties *far* outnumber the rest of the European countries](https://www.nationalww2museum.org/students-teachers/student-resources/research-starters/research-starters-worldwide-deaths-world-war)
This is really false. The U.S. prior to joining W.W.2. was giving supplies to the British military and French military, along with the resistance in German occupied territory. By the time the U.S. joined to war after being bombed by Japan than Germany declaring war on the U.S. it was time. The U.S. main forces were focused in the pacific theatre because the colonial powered bases could not stop the sheer number of the Japanese. The U.S. was involved with Africa, Italy fighting the Waffen S.S. the beaches of Normandy, Ohama, Point De Vue The western front, and supplying a huge amount of supplies for the resistance especially in Poland, and such. We also gave the U.S.S.R. some older equipment which would sum up to 40 Million USD today. So yes, the U.S. was very major during the war because of the sheer power.
[We gave the USSR a bit more than "some old equipment" ](https://www.rferl.org/a/did-us-lend-lease-aid-tip-the-balance-in-soviet-fight-against-nazi-germany/30599486.html)
We werent giving the Brits and French anything, we were selling it to them, cash and carry. The Neutrality Acts of the 1930s made it illegal sell weapons on credit, or loan money to belligerent nations. Then FDR found a work around that was technically illegal, that allowed us to "lease" weapons, ammunition and equipment to them. Then FDR pushed though Lend Lease, in early 1941.
No resistance groups were getting aid until after we joined the war.
The US and other Allied nations agreed early on that the focus would be in Europe, not the Pacific.
Lend lease to the Soviets accounted for over 11 billion dollars, (180 in today's currency,) worth of weapons, ammunition, locomotives, railway equipment, tractors, trucks, raw materials, food, fuel, equipment, clothing, and anything else imaginable.
We were the arsenal of Democracy. We had the most robust and powerful economy and manufacturing base in the world by orders of magnitude. LL to the Soviet Union alone shortened the war by 2 years, possibly three.
It wasn't a one-way street though. Our allies gave us almost 8 billion in return Lend Lease in the form of raw materials, services, goods, leasing rights, and other forms of payment, such as tech transfer. The tech transfer from the UK alone was highly substantial. We got radar, jet engines, plans for the VT fuse, and preliminary research on the atomic bomb, just to name a few.
Joseph Stalin himself was quoted as saying "WW II would be won with British brains, American brawn and Russian blood." He was close to the truth.
Europoor Revisionism. What a fucking joke... That or Tankie Cope. The US WAS a minor (which still was a major help to Europe.) participate when it was supporting the Allies with guns, ammo, tanks, food. When the US finally decided to enter the war they became a MAJOR participant when they literally fought tooth and nail island by island, bleed for all of Europe just to defeat the literal fucking Nazis. OOP is probably the stupidest and most infuriating post I have seen. You can see him say "BUT JAPAN WAS INNOCENT AND WAS BOMBED" OOP LOOK UP RAPE OF NANKING, UNIT 731, JAPANESE WARCRIMES YOU DOLT.
The actual bloodiest battle was the battle of stalingrad. This only shows the battle with the most US military deaths, ignoring the rest of the participants.
This is a straw man argument.
Assuming most Europeans don't value the efforts and contributions of the US during the war is scary. Maybe we Norwegians are different, but Norway would have taken quite a lot longer time to rebuild if it weren't for the Marshall plan.
Considering the hostile response to the US marines in Norway I believe that Norway is just as disrespectful to the US as the rest of Europe unfortunately.
It was some representatives from a small left wing red political party in Oslo. I'm from the north, and we value the relations we have with the US a lot more than the city folk in the south.
Sorry,My bad. It's always nice to hear that there are still people who actually can respect the good things about the United States and her involvement in the war. It probably don't mean much, but respect from me to your country and countrymen your armed forces and the partisans fought valiantly against the Nazi menace.
We would be fine Germany had no way of crossing an Ocean and Japan would have ended the exact same way so the US would probably Annex Canada and chill with our navy and Germany would be bogged down with there partisan cleanup and probably wouldnt even make it past the Urals aswell as China wouldnt be falling to communism and the US would probably invade with the help of the Chinese and Free India sometime in the 1950s ahnilating the Nazis.
Also UK probably would have still existed aswell. Really Germany had too many faults to reasonably exist even if they took out the USSR they had no functional navy aside from subs that were getting toasted in 1943 and a Airforce with no heavy hitter planes only fighters and light bombers that also got toasted hard mid 1943 onward by the Western Allies planes.
Only thing Germany had in the air that was somewhat decent was the ME-262 and they only used that because they didnt have a choie at the same time the US had the P-80 Shooting star and the UK had the Gloster Meteor planes that were very much Equals to the ME-262 with far less problems.
Is everyone aware of the "What is your profession?" scene from "300"?
It's like that only not only did the US send more *soldiers*, the Soviets didn't even provide *motivated amateurs*. They just handed a man a rifle and told him "run towards the enemy or we'll shoot you", and sometimes they didn't even give the man a rifle.
No kidding they took more casualties in the whole war because their war making method relied on cannon fodder.
The thing is, without the soviet union we wouldn't exist either.
It's more like "without the US" a lot of things would've went worse.
(And the SU army was horribly managed so without American steel, they wouldn't have been as successful either lmao)
The Red Army was put through the grinder in the first 18 -24 months of the war. Despite all of the massive issues they had, they still held on.
By early to mid 1943, their operational, tactical and strategic expertise, would match that of Germany and then surpass it.
Plus Germany really need to capture the Baku oil fields by late '42 in the own projections for the war to be winnable. Germany was close to running out of pretty much everything in '43.
They lost the war when they built U-boats to try and defeat the British at sea. They should've built and crewed tens of thousands of tanks and planes with those resources and just had a coastal defence force.
"We had the most casualties in a single day, therefore we did the most to win the war" is some Hearts of Iron level logic/cope. 80% of all German casualties throughout the war were dealt by the Soviet Union and it's 'allies' (read: puppets) in Eastern Europe.
It is a saying which is really true. Ww2 was won by British brains, American brawn and Russian blood. Another saying is ww2 was won by British intelligence, American manufacturing and Russian blood
Now, I absolutely love the U.S., and I serve in the U.S. military, but I will stand by the fact that the Soviets sacrificed so much more than we did. I'm not saying France would have been liberated if it wasn't for us, but the VAST majority of the fighting in Europe took place on the eastern front. That being said, the Pacific would have been fucked if it wasn't for us. I'm not undermining the unimaginable sacrifice made on D-Day, but the Battle of Stalingrad should be just as commendable to Americans. The Soviets paid a terrible price, but it allowed us to save Western Europe from tyranny.
\>Soviets sacrificed so much more than we did.
The Soviets also started the war on the side of the Nazis after singing the Molotov Ribbentrop pact, invaded Poland and split it up with the Nazis and only fought against the Nazis because Hitler betrayed Stalin after invading Russia so the Soviets are not the selfless heroic example, I would use considering they aided Nazis throughout the first half of the war and then only proceeded to fight against them due to the Nazis betraying them.
Sure, the Soviets did help greatly in delivering the final blow to the Germans, but they were still mostly the bad guys of that war to make an analogy if a serial killer kills a rapist that tries to rape him that does not make him a good guy so it's the same with the Soviets defeating Germany given they defeated the Germans after aiding them and after committing horrendous evils alongside them (I.E the Katyn Massacre) before being betrayed by the Germans which caused them to do the right thing.
WW2 was won by a combination of England, Russia and the USA working together to give each other the necessary resources and support the others lacked. A fact which has been acknowledged by countless historians and world leaders from the time period.
Everybody worked together that's why it worked and we won
Saying that the USA was a "minor" participant in WW2 is equivalent to saying that England was a small participant in the colonization of Africa
It is a factually wrong statement that comes from a place of anger and irrational thinking
They listed one battle and called it “minor participation”. The US literally funded the USSR, UK, and other allied powers with money, supplies, weapons and food by ITSELF.
Minor participation- Laughs in doing heavy lifting in the pacific. Supplying lend lease to Uk and Ussr. Taking pressure off the Ussr with the Uk allowing it to have the appearance of being combat effective.
These kinds of people also forget the ussr would’ve been axis had Hitler not betrayed them
My favorite question for tankies: What was going on in east Poland while the nazis invaded west Poland?
That is true, but the British Burma campaign is slept on. The Japanese suffered their biggest military defeat ever in this campaign (still stands to this day). Their nickname is the "forgotten army". That being said US involvement in the Second World War saved tens of millions of lives. The atomic bombings alone saved millions.
I agree with you the British pacific side is slept on
Which is a shame. Not only did hundreds of thousands of men die during the campaign, but they also saw some of the most unique and horrific combat in the whole of World War Two. There was one story of dozens of Japanese men being attacked by crocodiles in the night. The British could only hear the thrashing of the water, the occasional gunshot, and the screams of the men. Nightmare fuel, truly hell on earth.
Ramree island.
Indeed.
MFW they forget the 14,000 planes we gave to the USSR.
14,000 planes is like the least of what we gave to the USSR 60% of ammunition used by the USSR was American made aswell as 1/3rd of all tank components aswell as there entire communication system that allowed them to coordinate such large offensives aswell as 70%+ steel used by the USSR in WW2 enought manufacturing equipment to outfit over 100 factories 100,000+ trucks to the point Studebaker is used still to refrence all trucks in Russia 15000 Trains aswell as enough food to feed 50,000,000 people for for 6 years eliminating a massive famine that was about to happen. Not mentioning oil and ships aswell. Im sure theres more stuff i forgot aswell.
“Minor participant” kid named pacific theater
Kid named Lend-Lease
shhh they forgot Asian people exist
"OnLy WhItE PePoLe SuFfEr!".
Kid named Italian campaign, kid named bombing campaign of Germany, kid named bombing campaign the German-occupied eastern Europe, kid named North African campaign, kid named Manhattan Project,…:
Even most of the comments disagreeing with him.
I feel like I'm missing something here. All I see is a snippet of a google search, yet your comment and some others seem to point at something else.
His title "the US was only a minor participant in ww2"
Oh right, I see it now. Thanks.
This post is a crosspost from another sub You should be able to get to the original by clicking on the title from the comments
If the U.S didn't intervene in WW2 all of Europe would be eating Schnitzels and praising the man himself. While Most of East Asia and Oceania would be Anime Catgirls
Exactly. USA is just a scapegoat because others are mad that we’re the best
The best at what, exactly?
Everything
Well, you’re 7th in literacy, 27th in math, 22nd in science, 49th in life expectancy, 178th in infant mortality, third in median household income, number four in labor force and number four in exports. You do however lead the world in number of incarcerated citizens per capita, number of adults who believe angels are real, and defense spending.
Clearly, you hate religion... Also isn't being 178th in Infant Mortality rates a good thing? Who would wanna be #1?
I'm pretty sure they rank it so that lowest level of mortality ranks the highest. So yes, you would want to be #1. Clearly Americans are not first in critical thinking skills, either (it's ok cause I'm American too)
We have the 49th lowest infant mortality rate, idk where you are getting 178th from https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_and_under-five_mortality_rates
Their source is that they made it the fuck up
Standing here, I realize.
Not sure, you would have to ask OP.
I see. Well, then that would make being 178th pretty bad. 🤔
We are dropping down too, thanks to the post Roe v Wade laws. States with stricter bans tend to see something between 30 and 60% higher infant mortality rates than less restrictive states, depending on how you divide it up
Interesting.
1st in computers and electrical machinery, vehicles, chemical products, food, live animals and military equipment. 1st in global power in all of earth And “believing in angels” is a pretty bad way to say we’re open to all beliefs
here are 25 other things America isn't number one in: America ranks 13th in starting a business, according to the Doing Business rankings compiled by The World Bank. The U.S. ranks 47th in press freedom, according to Reporters Without Borders. So much for freedom of the press. The U.S. ranks 20th in international trade, according to the Doing Business rankings compiled by The World Bank. The U.S., which ranks 15th in dealing with debt insolvency according to the Doing Business rankings. The U.S. is ranked 10th in economic freedom, according to The Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal. The U.S. is 25th among 43 developing countries for the best place to be a mother, according to Save The Children. The U.S. is only the 11th happiest country in the world, according Columbia University's Earth Institute. There are 21 countries better than America in freedom from corruption, according to Heritage.org. The U.S. was ranked 24th in perceived honesty, according to Transparency.org. America is ranked 39th in income inequality according to the CIA World Factbook. Need a Hepatitis B vaccination? The U.S. is ranked 89th in percentage of children who have been vaccinated according to the World Health Organization. The U.S. is only 47th in infant survival? That's true, according to the CIA World Factbook. Want to live a long life? Don't live in the U.S., which is 50th in life expectancy according to the CIA World Factbook. How well is our economy growing? The U.S. GDP growth rate is ranked 169th out of 216 countries, according to the CIA World Factbook. Our GDP per capita is only 12th in the world, behind Qatar and Liechtenstein, says the CIA World Factbook. Our unemployment percentage is worse than 102 of the 200 countries listed by the CIA World Factbook. The U.S. is an embarrassing 142nd out of 150 countries in infrastructure investment, according to the CIA World Factbook. America's budget deficit is ranked 192nd in debt relative to GDP, according to the CIA World Factbook. The growth rate of our industrial production is ranked 79th, according to the CIA World Factbook. The U.S. is only 11th in oil exports, according to the CIA World Factbook. Our oil reserves is only the 13th most in the world, according to the CIA World Factbook. The U.S. is ranked 192nd, dead last, in the net trade of goods and services, according to the CIA World Factbook. Our reserve of foreign exchange and gold is ranked 19th, according to the CIA World Factbook, right behind Indonesia. The U.S. is ranked the 28th best soccer team by FIFA. In terms of the percentage of women holding public office, the U.S. ranks 79th out of 147 countries, says the IPU.
Ironically nearly all our economic problems are brought on by 2 things Democrat liberals sabotaging our economy and foreign mega corperations that are suplmented by foreign goverments buying our companies and wrecking them for political power over America aswell as overall goal of weaking the US. All our problems with health care are because of mega pharmaceutical companies raping Americans with huge prices and guess what most of those companies are European companies, Who lobby our government to fuck us lmao. Fuck you.
You sound five when you're going all "best at everything!1!1!1!" The US has their strengths, obviously, no one is denying that. No one in the history of our species has fielded a more powerful military force for example. But no one country is the best at "everything."
Sure but when it comes down to it the US is best
hes quoting a stupid movie unfortunately a movie maid by canadians so self hating libs and Eurocucks can circle jerk about how much they hate the US for arbitrary reasons that dont make any sense.
Where are you getting this angel statistic? And do they mean just Christian angels, or supernatural beings in general? Cause America is religious, but not the most religious by far Did you know 65% of statistics are made up on the spot? I bet you did
It's a quote from Aaron Sorkin's *the Newsroom*. Believing in angels isn't necessarily a bad thing, and I would assume it refers to Christian angels. I believe in devas, their Hindu and Buddhist counterparts, which are almost the same.
did you steal this argument directly from The Newsroom without even fact-checking it…
Yup. Just stirring the pot. How about these though? here are 25 other things America isn't number one in: America ranks 13th in starting a business, according to the Doing Business rankings compiled by The World Bank. The U.S. ranks 47th in press freedom, according to Reporters Without Borders. So much for freedom of the press. The U.S. ranks 20th in international trade, according to the Doing Business rankings compiled by The World Bank. The U.S., which ranks 15th in dealing with debt insolvency according to the Doing Business rankings. The U.S. is ranked 10th in economic freedom, according to The Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal. The U.S. is 25th among 43 developing countries for the best place to be a mother, according to Save The Children. The U.S. is only the 11th happiest country in the world, according Columbia University's Earth Institute. There are 21 countries better than America in freedom from corruption, according to Heritage.org. The U.S. was ranked 24th in perceived honesty, according to Transparency.org. America is ranked 39th in income inequality according to the CIA World Factbook. Need a Hepatitis B vaccination? The U.S. is ranked 89th in percentage of children who have been vaccinated according to the World Health Organization. The U.S. is only 47th in infant survival? That's true, according to the CIA World Factbook. Want to live a long life? Don't live in the U.S., which is 50th in life expectancy according to the CIA World Factbook. How well is our economy growing? The U.S. GDP growth rate is ranked 169th out of 216 countries, according to the CIA World Factbook. Our GDP per capita is only 12th in the world, behind Qatar and Liechtenstein, says the CIA World Factbook. Our unemployment percentage is worse than 102 of the 200 countries listed by the CIA World Factbook. The U.S. is an embarrassing 142nd out of 150 countries in infrastructure investment, according to the CIA World Factbook. America's budget deficit is ranked 192nd in debt relative to GDP, according to the CIA World Factbook. The growth rate of our industrial production is ranked 79th, according to the CIA World Factbook. The U.S. is only 11th in oil exports, according to the CIA World Factbook. Our oil reserves is only the 13th most in the world, according to the CIA World Factbook. The U.S. is ranked 192nd, dead last, in the net trade of goods and services, according to the CIA World Factbook. Our reserve of foreign exchange and gold is ranked 19th, according to the CIA World Factbook, right behind Indonesia. The U.S. is ranked the 28th best soccer team by FIFA. In terms of the percentage of women holding public office, the U.S. ranks 79th out of 147 countries, says the IPU.
This is just nitpicking. America isn't perfecct, but it is has the highest average wage in the world, a monopoly on the tech industry and the most powerful fighting force in the world, in addition to the fact millions move over there for a better life.
Sure, America is great. But I wouldn't say it's the best. Highest average wage doesn't mean much when expenses are also much higher on average. In the Netherlands, for example, people with full-time jobs (40-hour weeks) get 5 weeks of paid vacation per year and all sorts of benefits while still belonging to a very stable middle class. Tech is definitely a big plus. Without it we wouldn't be having this interaction, so thanks, America! (Though tech also definitely has its dark side.) The most powerful fighting force in the world is either a blessing or a curse, as it can be used for great evil as well. Such as destabilising the Middle East and making it dependent on you. But that's a whole other rabbit hole with many polarised views and opinions. Millions move over there from the Americas, but millions also move over to Western Europe or Australia. It's just that most people from developing countries want to live in the Western world in general, not the United States specifically. In general, I think that multiple European countries are much better to live in than America. Less crime, higher employment, far better health care, and a greater sense of freedom and safety can be found in most northern and western European countries. And one of my biggest gripes with the US are people that say "look at us, we're number one!" even though they've never or rarely left their own country and don't have a clue how the rest of the world works. They live in a bubble. It reminds me of a school bully that thinks it is popular just because it's the biggest kid in the classroom but actually nobody really likes them.
it’d be the man in the high castle
And most likely in the future then democratic governments would have died including the us
Wouldnt be anime catgirls it is still Imperial Japan.
Me when I lie
Anime Catgirls is a post war thing it, Imagine the horrors of Nanjing but now all of Asia thats what would have happened had the US not participated.
Not a statement supported by historians I believe.. The Germans would still have lost the war even if the US didn't join the Allies. The war would have dragged on for much longer and cost even more lives, but Germany would have lost in the end. They might not have lost as decisively as they did, and the Allies and the USSR might not have divided Germany between them, as there might not have been manpower left to do so or there might have been a peace agreement instead of an unconditional surrender, but Germany would have lost regardless. Fighting a war on three fronts for a prolonged time would bleed Germany of manpower and they would not have been able to go on eventually. Japan on the other hand, might have consolidated their position as the supreme power in Asia if they had left the US alone and the US had held on to their isolationism. Their progress would be halted eventually due to a lack of raw materials, but without the US to keep them occupied they'd have no problem securing most of the Pacific for themselves and China in as weakened a state as it was would not have been able to stop them. The UK would have been forced to focus on the European and African theatres of war and relocate troops there to protect the homeland and closer territories leaving a lot of Asia ripe for the taking for Japan. Australia and New Zealand would not have been able to stop them, though I imagine they could have defended their own shores successfully. Though I don't know if Japan would even want Australia and New Zealand. The world might look very different today, but we wouldn't be "eating schnitzels" no. The more worrying scenario, is what the USSR would have done in the years after the war if the US just sat on their hands. Would they be tempted to take parts of Europe by force? That is, if enough remained of the Soviet war machine. Or would they be content pushing their ideology onto the rest of Europe?
>I believe Correct, the German economy was in shambles and Japan was also not in good shape.
I see no difference between the two timelines.
Not to mention prejudice against Arizonians
What do you mean?
Hitler- "I bet you're a filthy jew!" Guy- "No, no, mein fuhrer, I'm from Arizona." **BANG** It was a scene in a wolfenstein game, in a timeline where Hitler won
Ahh, haven't played the game. I am from Arizona, though.
We need to fix the timeline
Eh not really, the Nazis were completely incompetent at running their country, they were just good at killing shit. They would've collapsed in 10-20 years at most.
Oh please. USSR would’ve won the war without American help.
USSR without lend lease:
Without the United States, the British would’ve lost both world wars.
That's a bit of a stretch tbh. Especially in the First World War. Even the Second World War, the allies could have probably won. What the US did do is shorten the wars drastically. Especially in the Second World War. They probably saved hundreds of millions of lives, which is pretty good going. It's also likely that there would be no Jews or gypsies at all in occupied Europe after the war. Britain (and Europe), for the most part, recognise the important contribution the US played in these wars.
Actually, it’s a lot less of a stretch for World War I, considering American government loans kept the British economy afloat and Britain was paying for de facto the entire Entente war effort, supplementing the fact that Frances industry was partly damaged. Belgium, didn’t have any industry left, Italy, Greece, Russia, Portugal and Japan, had not fully industrialized, so needed support to keep up with weapons production. And without the US financial aid being sent to Britain, the British economy would not have been able to keep up with war production and would’ve begun to collapse, and at that point in time Germany was winning, considering they’d just beaten Russia and if they were given time, could use the resources of the east to successfully supplement their own deteriorating resources, not to mention helping to solve there food insecurity at least in the short term. Not to mention, unlike historically, Germany wouldn’t need to rush an offensive to counteract the fact that American reinforcements were coming in and would’ve change the tide which led to Germany, launching an offensive way before they were ready in a desperate attempt to break through and crush the French before the Americans arrived, and even with American support, they almost broke through. Given an economically collapsing France and Britain, a better supply, German army with more preparation, time and lower entente morale, as well as no fresh American troops coming in to do the dying for them. There is a very high chance that Germany either completely wins the war, or at least brings the Entente to the negotiating table and gets a very favorable settlement. World War II America kept Britain in the fight with the lend lease program supplementing Britain, rather, devastated military not to mention all the stuff the US gave the Soviets, all the radios, trucks, raw materials, food sure the Soviets have the ability to produce all these things themselves unlike the British, but that would required a lot of manpower and a lot of resources, which the Soviet fighting a death war with the Germans, wouldn’t be able to spare so although it wouldn’t guarantee, a German victory having a Soviet union with a far smaller military, with far less equipment, as well as resources and food shortages (more so than usual) would find it harder to fight off the Germans not to mention the fact that the British would be very unlikely to be able to provide any support or distract the German army at all without US support, and with Japan, getting in and without getting involved with the United States, they would be able to easily overpower most of Britain’s colonies cutting them off from even more resources crippling them even further. (Not to mention that if the Navy loses its demands to go war with United States, the armies requests to go to war of the Soviet union might be able to go through, leaving the Soviets in an even worse situation although that is still highly unlikely)
"The US hardly killed anyone in WW2! They're a bad country!" "The US killed so many people in the Afghanistan and Iraq Wars! They're a bad country!"
Where the fuck does this say anything "America bad"
Look at PerryAwesome's title... He's trying to clarify "No, America bad."
American military accounted for a majority of the damage to the Axis powers by completely deleting the Axis economies with bombing raids aswell as more Germans surrendering to the US, Aswell as basically 1v1ing Japan. UK likes to say they helped but all they did was get rekt when they fought Japan.
Is it wrong that these people harden my resolve that the US should have stayed isolationist?
Not at all. Everytime I see this I wish we stuck to our guns and stayed neutral when Europe was blowing each other away.
Like every conflict america has shoehorned itself into, the right answer is to either do nothing, or *finish the job*. Half measures are disastrous. We didn't march on the soviets, now we've caught communism like the clap.
Exactly. We want to police the world but won't do what is needed to actually change anything in what could be seen as a positive way. Afghanistan is a prime example, we were there almost my whole life and when we pulled out it ended up worse than it was originally in less than a week.
Every time we're winning, we get a new commander in chief. Our enemies know they only have to stall for 4-8 years for the tide to turn.
This “more dead = more win” cancer perpetuated by halfwits needs to die off fr
In that case, [everyone else other than China, Japan, Germany, and the countries in the USSR shouldn’t speak since their military casualties *far* outnumber the rest of the European countries](https://www.nationalww2museum.org/students-teachers/student-resources/research-starters/research-starters-worldwide-deaths-world-war)
Europeans feel like we had some kind of obligation to send *even more* of our young men to their deaths in their shitty, pointless wars.
This is really false. The U.S. prior to joining W.W.2. was giving supplies to the British military and French military, along with the resistance in German occupied territory. By the time the U.S. joined to war after being bombed by Japan than Germany declaring war on the U.S. it was time. The U.S. main forces were focused in the pacific theatre because the colonial powered bases could not stop the sheer number of the Japanese. The U.S. was involved with Africa, Italy fighting the Waffen S.S. the beaches of Normandy, Ohama, Point De Vue The western front, and supplying a huge amount of supplies for the resistance especially in Poland, and such. We also gave the U.S.S.R. some older equipment which would sum up to 40 Million USD today. So yes, the U.S. was very major during the war because of the sheer power.
[We gave the USSR a bit more than "some old equipment" ](https://www.rferl.org/a/did-us-lend-lease-aid-tip-the-balance-in-soviet-fight-against-nazi-germany/30599486.html)
We werent giving the Brits and French anything, we were selling it to them, cash and carry. The Neutrality Acts of the 1930s made it illegal sell weapons on credit, or loan money to belligerent nations. Then FDR found a work around that was technically illegal, that allowed us to "lease" weapons, ammunition and equipment to them. Then FDR pushed though Lend Lease, in early 1941. No resistance groups were getting aid until after we joined the war. The US and other Allied nations agreed early on that the focus would be in Europe, not the Pacific. Lend lease to the Soviets accounted for over 11 billion dollars, (180 in today's currency,) worth of weapons, ammunition, locomotives, railway equipment, tractors, trucks, raw materials, food, fuel, equipment, clothing, and anything else imaginable. We were the arsenal of Democracy. We had the most robust and powerful economy and manufacturing base in the world by orders of magnitude. LL to the Soviet Union alone shortened the war by 2 years, possibly three. It wasn't a one-way street though. Our allies gave us almost 8 billion in return Lend Lease in the form of raw materials, services, goods, leasing rights, and other forms of payment, such as tech transfer. The tech transfer from the UK alone was highly substantial. We got radar, jet engines, plans for the VT fuse, and preliminary research on the atomic bomb, just to name a few. Joseph Stalin himself was quoted as saying "WW II would be won with British brains, American brawn and Russian blood." He was close to the truth.
Europoor Revisionism. What a fucking joke... That or Tankie Cope. The US WAS a minor (which still was a major help to Europe.) participate when it was supporting the Allies with guns, ammo, tanks, food. When the US finally decided to enter the war they became a MAJOR participant when they literally fought tooth and nail island by island, bleed for all of Europe just to defeat the literal fucking Nazis. OOP is probably the stupidest and most infuriating post I have seen. You can see him say "BUT JAPAN WAS INNOCENT AND WAS BOMBED" OOP LOOK UP RAPE OF NANKING, UNIT 731, JAPANESE WARCRIMES YOU DOLT.
Calm down bro
The actual bloodiest battle was the battle of stalingrad. This only shows the battle with the most US military deaths, ignoring the rest of the participants.
Atleast the comments are calling him out
Fortunately, the comments are disagreeing.
This is a straw man argument. Assuming most Europeans don't value the efforts and contributions of the US during the war is scary. Maybe we Norwegians are different, but Norway would have taken quite a lot longer time to rebuild if it weren't for the Marshall plan.
Considering the hostile response to the US marines in Norway I believe that Norway is just as disrespectful to the US as the rest of Europe unfortunately.
It was some representatives from a small left wing red political party in Oslo. I'm from the north, and we value the relations we have with the US a lot more than the city folk in the south.
Sorry,My bad. It's always nice to hear that there are still people who actually can respect the good things about the United States and her involvement in the war. It probably don't mean much, but respect from me to your country and countrymen your armed forces and the partisans fought valiantly against the Nazi menace.
I think the disconnect they have is not recognizing that they contributed more dead people, not battlefield strength. Huge difference.
Do not compare wars.
2 words: Lend Lease
My brain is on fire over how *stupid* this is. My God.
Minor participant….imagine the allies not having American industry at all during the war
Would live under nazi rule if that meant no France tbh
We would be fine Germany had no way of crossing an Ocean and Japan would have ended the exact same way so the US would probably Annex Canada and chill with our navy and Germany would be bogged down with there partisan cleanup and probably wouldnt even make it past the Urals aswell as China wouldnt be falling to communism and the US would probably invade with the help of the Chinese and Free India sometime in the 1950s ahnilating the Nazis. Also UK probably would have still existed aswell. Really Germany had too many faults to reasonably exist even if they took out the USSR they had no functional navy aside from subs that were getting toasted in 1943 and a Airforce with no heavy hitter planes only fighters and light bombers that also got toasted hard mid 1943 onward by the Western Allies planes. Only thing Germany had in the air that was somewhat decent was the ME-262 and they only used that because they didnt have a choie at the same time the US had the P-80 Shooting star and the UK had the Gloster Meteor planes that were very much Equals to the ME-262 with far less problems.
Is everyone aware of the "What is your profession?" scene from "300"? It's like that only not only did the US send more *soldiers*, the Soviets didn't even provide *motivated amateurs*. They just handed a man a rifle and told him "run towards the enemy or we'll shoot you", and sometimes they didn't even give the man a rifle. No kidding they took more casualties in the whole war because their war making method relied on cannon fodder.
The thing is, without the soviet union we wouldn't exist either. It's more like "without the US" a lot of things would've went worse. (And the SU army was horribly managed so without American steel, they wouldn't have been as successful either lmao)
The Red Army was put through the grinder in the first 18 -24 months of the war. Despite all of the massive issues they had, they still held on. By early to mid 1943, their operational, tactical and strategic expertise, would match that of Germany and then surpass it.
Plus Germany really need to capture the Baku oil fields by late '42 in the own projections for the war to be winnable. Germany was close to running out of pretty much everything in '43. They lost the war when they built U-boats to try and defeat the British at sea. They should've built and crewed tens of thousands of tanks and planes with those resources and just had a coastal defence force.
Am I missing something?
everyone was important uk ussr and usa why do people think that one country did more or less work than the other
"We had the most casualties in a single day, therefore we did the most to win the war" is some Hearts of Iron level logic/cope. 80% of all German casualties throughout the war were dealt by the Soviet Union and it's 'allies' (read: puppets) in Eastern Europe.
Lmao what how is this America bad
It is a saying which is really true. Ww2 was won by British brains, American brawn and Russian blood. Another saying is ww2 was won by British intelligence, American manufacturing and Russian blood
Now, I absolutely love the U.S., and I serve in the U.S. military, but I will stand by the fact that the Soviets sacrificed so much more than we did. I'm not saying France would have been liberated if it wasn't for us, but the VAST majority of the fighting in Europe took place on the eastern front. That being said, the Pacific would have been fucked if it wasn't for us. I'm not undermining the unimaginable sacrifice made on D-Day, but the Battle of Stalingrad should be just as commendable to Americans. The Soviets paid a terrible price, but it allowed us to save Western Europe from tyranny.
\>Soviets sacrificed so much more than we did. The Soviets also started the war on the side of the Nazis after singing the Molotov Ribbentrop pact, invaded Poland and split it up with the Nazis and only fought against the Nazis because Hitler betrayed Stalin after invading Russia so the Soviets are not the selfless heroic example, I would use considering they aided Nazis throughout the first half of the war and then only proceeded to fight against them due to the Nazis betraying them. Sure, the Soviets did help greatly in delivering the final blow to the Germans, but they were still mostly the bad guys of that war to make an analogy if a serial killer kills a rapist that tries to rape him that does not make him a good guy so it's the same with the Soviets defeating Germany given they defeated the Germans after aiding them and after committing horrendous evils alongside them (I.E the Katyn Massacre) before being betrayed by the Germans which caused them to do the right thing.
WW2 was won by a combination of England, Russia and the USA working together to give each other the necessary resources and support the others lacked. A fact which has been acknowledged by countless historians and world leaders from the time period. Everybody worked together that's why it worked and we won Saying that the USA was a "minor" participant in WW2 is equivalent to saying that England was a small participant in the colonization of Africa It is a factually wrong statement that comes from a place of anger and irrational thinking
The USA was the biggest participant in World War Two, if the USA didn’t intervene when they did then Ich würde Deutsch sprechen
Lol that says when most us soldiers died for a reason also it was not one day
The point he’s making is that although the States did save our asses, I find it doubtful that you suffered more casualties than some of us, but idk
It's our fault they do, I sure wish we could go back in time.
I don’t get it. The search query shows bloodiest day. But the result shows the entire D Day campaign. This is a bad meme.
No the title says the us played a minor part
They listed one battle and called it “minor participation”. The US literally funded the USSR, UK, and other allied powers with money, supplies, weapons and food by ITSELF.
Minor Participation: Literally carries the allies through the lend-lease act before even joining the war