USSR, USA and UK saved everyone in WW2 - Page 4 - Historum

Thessalonian · February 12th, 2012, 07:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kablooblab

This forum makes me feel dumber by the day. I thought England was fighting Germany and were losing, America stepped in and really saved the day. Then Russia went in and cleaned up the scraps on the east.

No. The USSR began to destroy the Germans, then USA stepped in when Germany was already losing the war against the USSR and then Hollywood movies made you think that you saved Europe to increase your self-pride.
The USA played a more significant role in WW1, actually. In WW2, the protagonist was the USSR who was crushing the Nazis.

sylla1 · February 12th, 2012, 08:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kablooblab

This forum makes me feel dumber by the day. I thought England was fighting Germany and were losing, America stepped in and really saved the day. Then Russia went in and cleaned up the scraps on the east.

Only if you may call "scraps" no less than 80% of the total European Axis forces, >90% for the critical tide turning years.

And of course, learning something in more detail is definitively no reason for "feeling dumber"; actually, it is exactly the opposite

betgo · February 12th, 2012, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by irishcrusader95

oh i would so watch that

perhaps its a bit understandable why the soviet involvement in the war was underrated for so long. the cold war made any real study of it difficult for western audiences so there only sources for years on it was the memoirs of german commanders there which only showed one side of it. David Glantz the foremost historian on the SU in WW2 wrote this interesting blog on why it was so underrated for so long and why getting a full picture of events was so difficult.
Pre-1990 Bias in Eastern Front Historiography

Yeh, I read the article. Seems like Soviet claims were dismissed as Communist propaganda in the US and elsewhere. Also, there wasn't much accurate Soviet history written under Stalin.

sylla1 · February 12th, 2012, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by betgo

Yeh, I read the article. Seems like Soviet claims were dismissed as Communist propaganda in the US and elsewhere.

I'm pretty sure it happened the same regarding the US contributions to WW2 as depicted by the Soviet textbooks.

**irishcrusader95** · February 12th, 2012, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by betgo

Yeh, I read the article. Seems like Soviet claims were dismissed as Communist propaganda in the US and elsewhere. Also, there wasn't much accurate Soviet history written under Stalin.

dident help either that many of the soviets records of the war were still sealed until the end of the SU. its funny enough in reading it how it mentions the way the real picture slowly builds. major defeats were not mentioned such as Kharkov in 1942, then it was mentioned as 'a minor action took place here but was unsuccessful' before finally a clearer picture is revealed of it.

**Bish** · February 12th, 2012, 11:48 AM

Seems to be this is repeating a thread we had a week or so ago. And i'm not sure its what the OP intended. Or am i wrong.