Should Germany claim to be the victims in Poland?

Apart from North Africa..........

Where only 2 german divisions were employed.

Still a front.
Many many more of hitlers italian allies were there,and dont believe all you read about italys forces,some were awfull some elite.
Still had to defend the Atlantic coast line,another front,if you like.

That's the deluded Brit's! :)
Don't believe your war movies to much...a Germany without having to concentrate on Russia and you without the help you got from the US....just be fair and you would say so yourself..no chance!

There is nothing shameful about it....your island IS brave but very limited if you would have to stand all on your own!
Like I said, the only thing needed to take the Brits out would be a blockade....

Which you tried ,and indead failed to do. The U boat fleet came very close ,but not close enough.


I dont argue with this point one bit. It was the world rising up to stop the nazis that cracked the nut. Still we did hold out pretty much alone(with dribs and drabs of allies) and did indeed kick rommels arse all the way back to berlin.

Thats the problem the hun never understood,"we" would never have to stand alone,we new we could count on the help of the Dominions and the help from our other,european allies/fellow travlers was an added bonus and one that every educated briton is eternaly greatfull for.

First Southern the comment that when Germany attacked Russia their was only one front. That's partially true. Britain was not yet defeated, so Germany still needed to concentrate some forces in the west in case Britain counterattacked. So Hitler was not able to concentrate all his forces on Russia. Also to answer bratwurst UK had a strong navy, so it would not be so easy to put a blockade on the UK and somewhat powerful airforce.

But the question was: "Who was most important for the Allies to win WWII"

So....without the US and Russia the Brit's wouldn't had stood a chance against a victorious Germany with an Europe of conquered/allied/collaborating nations.

But the US or Russia didn't need a GB that much...it's an easy calculation actually and no need to get all huffy and puffy!




No...surely not easy!

But the german navy would grew (think more Bismarcks) and there was the wolf packs prowling the sea.
Then there would be a starving Great Britain...starving not only in food but also in materials, ammunition....I think it's hard to hold out for long when every ship destroyed or every fighter shot down can't be repaired or replaced anymore!
The Germans would just have to wait actually....

PS: And just imagine our Luftwaffe which mostly nearly the whole time was busy in Russia fighting against GB not Russia....

The USA wouldnt have even entered the war had it not been for britain staying in the fight......your argument/question is therefore meaningless

Sorry,if this was true,why am I not speaking German then? USA,enters war on December the 11th 1941,only after silly tasch declares war.the hun had from june 6th 1940 to febuary 1942(when first US units arrived in UK ) to "kick our arses" and failed miserably. Face it, gitler never came close to subjuing the British nation and never would have.Even if some hun troops had crossed the channel "Britain"( govt,armed forces high command,royals etc) would have essentially upped sticks and moved to Canada where all our gold was.

What makes you so convinced?
It was in the best interest of the US to make sure Germany would NOT be domineering the continent....

And for the rest....english IS very close to German! :)

bollox,you threw the might of the lufftwaffe against these shores a year before you turned on russia,and went home licking your wounds.....
and all that about the german navy,dont make me laugh, the only time surface vessels broke out of port they were hammered by RN and RAF,utter tosh mate.Like I said,the U boats came close to hampering supplies but only for the tiny period when you upgraded your cyphers.

Really,thats odd,USA had some VERY lucrative contracts with germany/nazi germany. IBMs Jew finding computor to name just one....to USA,better nazi germany it could trade with than peoples republic of europa/soviet satalite state.

The Brits run with their tails between the legs from Dunkirk, you tried to lock heads with the Wehrmacht in Norway again and lost again.
You only made it back at D-Day under the umbrella of overwhelming material- and air superiority of the US.
You kicked nobodies arse!

Germany would have subjugated the islands easily if there would have been the same concentration behind it like for example in Russia...
But Hitler was never as interested in british arse...that's why he let you run away in Dunkirk...

doesnt matter what you say brat - germany still lost and thats all there is to it

bollox,French command collapsed,we were under french command,our flanks manned by the french and belgians disapeared and we evacuated 360.000 troops from dunkirk,troops that went on to kick rommels arse all over africa.

You really love sticking up for the LOSING side dont you. Newsflash,YOU LOST THE WAR....for the second time in 20 odd years YOU LOST,so argue your theories as much as you like,YOU LOST. You tried to subjegate a continent and ended up with half your gene pool russian. ha ha,duetshland uber alles,yes,above all at getting backsides spanked in wars of agression.

Hitler personally gave the fatal order to the Panzerdivisions to stop their advance and let English escape in Dunkerk.If he had not intervened bitish forces would have been encircled and all harbours would have fallen in german hands.

Och nö....not another one who thinks the biggest chasing action was actually a big win!

It's no use discussing it any further....




PS: The question was "Who was most important for the allied WIN"....so yes I know the Axis lost and I tried to give and explain my opinion.
I can't help it if it isn't to your liking! :)

Makes me a Nazi, yes?

No,just a hun :)

sorry... which country had occupying armies for the last half century or so...? definately not mine... england never never never shall be slaves

Just a friendly advise....don't believe TV or movies that much, just read some historians!
Also english ones would rather lean to my understanding of the war than to yours....you might learn something...

PS: Calling a German a hun is another sign of historical misunderstandings on the british side....




They would have been without the Russians and the US on their side!

....which was the question....

lets keep a firm grip on reality and try and leave hypothetical supositions out of this

You must see that hypothetical:

How would the war had gone if Russia and Germany maintained peace and the US would had sat back disinterested and totally neutral?

There you have your answer....

Bratwurst I agree US was more powerful then Britain during WW2 but the question is who contributed more. If talking about the most powerful of the allies. It would go like this US RUSSIA UK FRANCE POLAND
However talking about contribution I think RUSSIA UK US POLAND FRANCE . JUST MY OPINION

Some people use hun as a term of endearment.
Oh! Wrong kind of hun.

Russia US UK Poland France

we were 4th

Bratwurst I agree US was more powerful then Britain during WW2 but the question is who contributed more. If talking about the most powerful of the allies. It would go like this US RUSSIA UK FRANCE POLAND
However talking about contribution I think RUSSIA UK US POLAND FRANCE . the most powerful countries didn't always make the greatest contribution.

how the war would have gone in different circumstances is academic - it didnt happen and we can only speculate

what did happen, and is recorded in history for future generations to remember, is that germany was put firmly in its place, twice, in a fifty year period

Do I talk against a wall here?

It's not about who won or lost....the question was who was most important for the win of the allies!
For that you just have to answer yourself some questions...take a country out of the equation, see what would most likely to happen and there you have your answer!

But for some it is definitely to hard to think about....



It was the american material and air superiority which made fighting at the western front so difficult for the mostly second and often third rate german troops...

Max Hastings has a lot to tell about that! Recommendable

of course england was the most important country - we were there at the start and we were there at the end... who else can say that without having to conceed to a bottom spanking in between...?

Are you proud of that Bubba?
Again you needed the US to win this war....you maintained a cruel blockade which did cost nearly one million of german civilians to die of hunger to force the Germans to subscribe to a highly disputed treaty which sowed the seeds of hate for Adolf Hitler to reape who just a few years later would start a new war which did cost Europe much more...

But at least some Brits can beat their chests proudly!

Lukasz that list that you made was for most powerful or for biggest contribution?

Like to point out Poles are some of the best strategist but they never have the technology or numbers to match for them to be powerful. On the otherhand US crappy strategists throughout history but what saves them is either their numbers or technology or sometimes both

Can we at least agree that France contributed the least.

geez mate, that sounds suspiciously like passing the blame... are you sure youre not polish?