darkboong said:It appears to me that many Americans have a slim to zero grasp of the geo-political basics of the world at that time. Even more worrying many of those historically challenged Americans don't appear to have any incentive or willingness to actually learn anything beyond the jingoistic kindergarten blag regarding the US's involvement in WWII.
FWIW, thanks for selling us the Aircraft. Thanks for helping putting Germany back on it's feet, thanks for the people who fought to bring ******'s lunacy to an end. You can stuff the "you would be talking German if it wasn't for us" crapola, and you can start paying some respect and recognition to the *millions* of Europeans who sacrificed their lives for the cause.
With respect, American casualties didn't even make up 1% of the total dead in Europe, nor did US forces account for the majority of ******'s losses (if anyone has that claim the Russians do). There is no doubt in my mind that the US did make a decisive contribution to the European theatre, but it appears to me that over the long haul ******'s Reich was on the ropes as soon as the Russians got their armor together.
BTW : I have seen (first hand) the German high command maps of the Eastern Front for '42,'43,'44 and '45. The scrawled notes and movement orders indicated that they felt the writing was on the wall by mid 43 (it was spooky seeing the signatures of the Wehrmacht's top brass on those maps). Holding all that turf and fighting the Russians was just too much for them (as they told ****** repeatedly according to Albert Speer's "Inside the Third Reich")...
If I had to choose between the Russian contribution and the American one, I would probably have to pick the Russian, but I prefer to have both.
Excellent synopsis.
It's evident, going on the posts of CR, DMc and Wolfix, that only a partial and inaccurate account of USA's involvement in WWII, is taught to Americans.
They're obviously taught that the USA was responsible for liberating Europe.
This is partially correct.
The Soviet and British forces played an equal, if not more crucial part in the liberation of Europe, than the USA did.
As you correctly point out, the German generals realised that by mid-1943,
the Soviets were winning the battle on the Eastern front.
Granted the US had made inroads (with Montgomery) in to North Africa but as the Eastern front required more and more German resources, it was the Soviet
response which caused the first major stumbling of the Nazi forces.
Granted that without the US involvement the allied effort to defeat Germany
would have taken longer - but I have no doubt that Russia and Britain eventually would have beaten the German war machine.
The other part of WWII history which is not taught in the US school system is
how the USA Inc profitted from victory over Germany.
The US education system details how the Marshall Plan "helped to save and regenerate Europe post-1945".
The Marshall Plan is portrayed as almost a charitable donation on the part of the USA to Europe.
It wasn't.
The Marshall Plan was created to benefit Europe, but also to benefit a sizable plethora of US interests such as Coca-Cola, IBM (the same compnay who sold technology to the Nazi's), Ford, GM and many others.
None of this is taught in the US education system.
Reminds me of the inlaw from New York who tried to tell me how the USA won the war in Vietnam, some years back.
Transpired that she was taught this in school.
Frightening stuff.