Who did most to defeat the Axis? Britain, the US or the USSR?

Who did most to defeat the Axis?

  • The British Empire

    Votes: 10 13.7%
  • The US

    Votes: 9 12.3%
  • The USSR

    Votes: 52 71.2%
  • Other (China?)

    Votes: 2 2.7%

  • Total voters


Ad Honorem
Jul 2013
San Antonio, Tx
Ahem, as I recall we actually had lend you one of our carriers to fight in the Pacific as you had run out of your own? (anyone help me with the name?). And I would say the US 'phoned it in' in the Indian Ocean and the Med. And the Arctic convoys. Plus our carriers had armoured decks so when we took Kamikazes off Okinawa we just got out the brooms and kept fighting whilst the US carriers with their wooden decks had to limp home. No point having a bigger air wing with no carrier to operate off?
The unofficial name for the British carrier lent to us was the “USS Robin”.
The British carriers had steel decks that didn’t burn like candles as in the US Navy. This bashing is really getting tiresome.
The British armored flight decks were rejected early on, as the Bureau of Shipbuilding (BuShips, now the Naval Sea Systems Command) felt that armored decks would make the Essexes less seaworthy. A valid concern, as the Improved Essex (Midway class, more or less Essexes with armored flight decks) , had a tendency to wallow in heavy seas. Another concern was that the increased displacement would reduce range and airwing size. The seaworthiness and air wing size issues were only resolved by USS Forrestal, the first supercarrier.

The Essexes saw active combat in three wars, WW2, Korea, and Vietnam. The most heavily damaged carrier in Naval history to return to port under her own power was an Essex, USS FRANKLIN, CV-13. And the last, USS Lexington, was not retired until 1991.

It's said a good ship does one thing well, but a great ship does many things well. The Essexes were easily one of the best designed ships in Naval history, seeing service for the entire Cold War.

Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk
May 2011
Navan, Ireland
Oh God, let’s call it a draw. Or a tie.

The British of course -- some educated Americans can make a sound case (I don't agree with it but its sound enough) for a draw, some jingoistic Americans claim a win (ridiculous) , The Canadians claim a win (fair enough) the Native Americans well they were well and truly " up excrement creek without a means of propulsion".
Jul 2017
Nope, incorrect

You'll note that the video that you posted doesn't reference WWII casualties, only WWII deaths.

The Germans suffered MORE permanant casualties (killed, missing, captured) to the western Allies than to the Soviets.

Stalingrad was only won with assistance from the Western Allies, otherwise it would have very likely been a heavy defeat for the Soviets
I meant killed and wounded yes, not captured because let's be honest, in the end the Germans preferred to surrender to the Western Allies, (even the French captured 900,000 Germans in the end) so this is not representative

You are totally wrong for Stalingrad, the lend lease in 1942 was very low, it only comes in quantity after the battle of Kursk.

David Glantz himself says that the lend lease in 1941 and 1942 was not significant.


Last edited:
Sep 2016
Stalin won the war. He led Soviet Union to victory ! It is a crime that Americans and British try to steal his victory. You should all be thankful and never use your filthy propaganda against him.