Jump to content


Did America really save the Allies in WWI?


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
79 replies to this topic

VKSheridan #61 Posted 12 March 2017 - 03:25 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 23314 battles
  • 3,462
  • Member since:
    01-31-2016

Interesting thread with an unclear objective.  Like others, I've never heard a slant singling any given nation that "won" WW1 but I feel like I'm reading one that certainly suggests the Americans didn't.  War has many facets that historians incessantly try to tie a single moment to a turning point whether it be a lost battle, commander or battle plan.  I think defeat comes from the sum of actions/inactions and no amount of "yeah but what if" can change that.  You can't change a single point and think nothing else unrevealed won't be affected.  

 

For example, it's like saying if the mule had kicked your grandfather a few degrees to the left, your brother would been your sister.  Of course, that assumes mother wasn't cheating with the blacksmith.  Nobody knows all the facts so theorizing with just the apparent ones is merely an exercise for a fragile ego........ Peace.



x rocketfish x #62 Posted 13 March 2017 - 12:14 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 15671 battles
  • 842
  • Member since:
    05-27-2015
I am American. I was born in 1966. I have never seen or heard WW1 referred to like this. Clowns on Facebook or anywhere else may find it amusing to troll or otherwise boast or make themselves annoying. Take what they say with the proverbial grain of salt.

USMC29PALMS671 #63 Posted 15 March 2017 - 08:16 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 11153 battles
  • 730
  • [R34C]
  • Member since:
    02-13-2014
What the hell is this? Did the American bring fear of defeat to the Central Powers? Oh yes and probably motivated them to the peace negotiations. Did America actually WON the war for the allies? No and far from it. World War I was the last hurrah for traditional ideas of power (empire). World War II ended the ideas of empire all together. Now, if we go colonize space I guarantee we will be back on square one on an interplanetary, maybe even galaxy spanning in terms of organization. Second coming hooray!   

 


Big Yeash #64 Posted 15 March 2017 - 03:00 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 21675 battles
  • 2,941
  • [BNKR]
  • Member since:
    08-25-2015

View PostJPWNAGE83, on 15 March 2017 - 08:16 AM, said:

What the hell is this? Did the American bring fear of defeat to the Central Powers? Oh yes and probably motivated them to the peace negotiations. Did America actually WON the war for the allies? No and far from it. World War I was the last hurrah for traditional ideas of power (empire). World War II ended the ideas of empire all together. Now, if we go colonize space I guarantee we will be back on square one on an interplanetary, maybe even galaxy spanning in terms of organization. Second coming hooray!   

 

WWII didn't really end "the idea of empire", just how empire was considered before and during the war. Imperial colonialism (mostly) died, but new "empires" simply arose in the two blocs of the Cold War.

3MOE - T29*** - AMX ELC bis***, AMX 13 75***Skoda T24*** - Fave 2MOE;

Pershing**, T32**, M103**, T25/2** - Centurion 7/1**, Excelsior**, Conqueror** - Champion**, E-75**, Ferdinand**, WT auf Pz.IV** - AMX 13 90** - MT-25**, T-44**, T-54**, Fatherland**, T-10**, ISU-152** - Skoda T25**


SirDerp-a-lot #65 Posted 20 March 2017 - 12:44 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 57159 battles
  • 8,454
  • [GER_1]
  • Member since:
    05-15-2016

View PostHighbornShihtzu, on 28 June 2016 - 11:38 PM, said:

Fun facts:  if you go to the sight today you are likely to be killed by not the ammo in the ships hull but by modern ordnance (insue conspiracy theories) on ship. Several documentaries on this fact.

 

Please point them out.

Niles Y93 #66 Posted 20 March 2017 - 10:12 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 10040 battles
  • 801
  • Member since:
    02-15-2014

View Postkorbendallas-01, on 20 March 2017 - 07:44 AM, said:

 

Please point them out.

The conspiracy theories or the documentaries?



SirDerp-a-lot #67 Posted 20 March 2017 - 11:28 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 57159 battles
  • 8,454
  • [GER_1]
  • Member since:
    05-15-2016

View PostNiles Y93, on 20 March 2017 - 10:12 PM, said:

The conspiracy theories or the documentaries?

 

Both would be nice, but I was asking about the documentaries.

Uranprojekt #68 Posted 01 April 2017 - 07:26 PM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 8338 battles
  • 3,437
  • Member since:
    08-19-2013

View PostBig Yeash, on 12 March 2017 - 12:55 PM, said:

 

>wwi

>"good guys"

>pick one

 

I've actually rarely heard "allied powers" used to describe the "allies" in WWI - the official name of the original "allies", so I thought, was the Entente, which I believe was Britain, France and Belgium.

 

The Triple Entente was a pact between France, Britain and Russia. The French actually had separate arrangements with the other two prior to 1907 (a date which will become relevant in a minute), with the French having signed a treaty, the Franco-Russian Alliance, with the Russians in 1894 and then signed the Entente Cordiale with the British in 1904. In 1907 (I said it would become relevant) the British signed the Anglo-Russian Convention (more of a treaty to stop the Great Game of land grabbing in Asia between the two nations than an actual alliance) which resulted in the three nations sharing diplomatic ties with one another. It is important to note that the Triple Entente was not an alliance, merely a "friendship" (what "Cordiale" means in French) between Europe's three largest powers. The three powers were not bound to each other, but they did recognise the importance of assisting the others in a future European conflict, a conflict they only had to wait 7 years for.

Japan and Portugal were also tacked on to the Triple Entente through separate arrangements with the Entente powers, but were not a part of the Entente.

 

Belgium is different story. As per the 1839 Treaty of London, the independence and neutrality of Belgium was officially recognised by the signatory nations of the Treaty; Belgium, the Netherlands, Austria, Germany, France, Russia and Britain. Said signatory nations were not only to recognise Belgian neutrality but were also bound to defend it if Belgium called for aid in defending her sovereign borders. Prior to the German invasion of Belgium in 1914, the Belgian government put out such a call.

It was only the British who answered, going to war over, as Theobald von Bethmann Hollweg, German Chancellor at the time, put it, "a scrap of paper".

(As a note/condensed view of why only the British actually answered the Belgian call: the French had their own German-shaped concerns, the Austro-Hungarians were in cahoots with Germany so they weren't going to defend Belgium against German aggressions, the Dutch were busy trying to shore up their own defences and the Russians would have to fight through the Germans and Austro-Hungarians, and possibly the Ottomans, to get to Belgium.)


War does not determine who is right, only who is left - Bertrand Russell

 

I write things, things which can be found in Historical Discussions. Things like this article on the Soviet invasion of Manchuria in 1945 and this article on the Spanish Civil War.

 

To those of you who don't molest the English language, I salute you. For everyone else, there's this handy link; http://www.reverso.n...elling-grammar/


BigDaddyKTx #69 Posted 03 April 2017 - 02:54 AM

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 13476 battles
  • 244
  • Member since:
    02-27-2014

View PostNSW Mntd Rifles, on 29 May 2016 - 05:33 PM, said:

By the time the USA entered the Great War Britain and France were in serious need of reinforcement. Italy was tottering and the male populations of all allied countries were depleted by three years of catastrophic warfare. With the fall of Russia, there was a potential that they could sue for peace. My own country (Australia), admittedly with an all volunteer army, was fielding divisions with small numbers of men.

 

The great contribution the USA made to the Great War was the confidence it provided in the promise of fresh troops. This was critical to sustaining the fighting spirit of the other allied nations. It had an impact on the final outcome.

 

By the way the 1964 BBC series "The Great War" is, in my mind, still the most wonderful documentary on that conflict. I watched it as a boy and the memory of it has stayed with me for fifty years: https://www.youtube....wGM_3l-_QfxFj9B

 

Well put sir! Morale boosting and such. On a side note, I've seen several excellent Aussie films depicting Australia's involvement in conflicts from the late 19th/early 20th century. Breaker Morant, which I believe was about the Boer wars in South Africa, Gallipoli and The Lighthorsemen, immediately come to mind. All excellent films!

NombieLord #70 Posted 03 April 2017 - 12:29 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 31551 battles
  • 828
  • [BNKR]
  • Member since:
    03-01-2014

Win the war?  All by our onesies?

 

No.  But you're welcome anyway... ungrateful tweens


If you think you see me coming, you're just imagining things...

mhogee #71 Posted 03 April 2017 - 02:07 PM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 39851 battles
  • 1,715
  • Member since:
    02-04-2014

my TLDR verison is yes USA did help mostly with their mass production 

axis factories were being destoried and Allies kept on getting resuplied 


Edited by mhogee, 03 April 2017 - 02:08 PM.


Niles Y93 #72 Posted 03 April 2017 - 02:27 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 10040 battles
  • 801
  • Member since:
    02-15-2014

View Postmhogee, on 03 April 2017 - 09:07 AM, said:

my TLDR verison is yes USA did help mostly with their mass production 

axis factories were being destoried and Allies kept on getting resuplied 

Uhhhh, I think you have the wrong war. This is talking about WWI, not WWII.



NombieLord #73 Posted 04 April 2017 - 02:27 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 31551 battles
  • 828
  • [BNKR]
  • Member since:
    03-01-2014
^ Just flat-out ungrateful :facepalm:
If you think you see me coming, you're just imagining things...

Niles Y93 #74 Posted 05 April 2017 - 08:12 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 10040 battles
  • 801
  • Member since:
    02-15-2014

View PostNombieLord, on 03 April 2017 - 09:27 PM, said:

^ Just flat-out ungrateful :facepalm:

 

Would you like to go to my profile to see where I'm from, good sir?

Kryptic xSnip3z #75 Posted 17 April 2017 - 07:08 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 15019 battles
  • 577
  • [RDDT]
  • Member since:
    09-19-2013

While it probably ended a little quicker the Allies would've won regardless of whether or not America joined.

 

And just in case someone has an issue with my opinion I'm American.


   

                                                   Friends call me Kryptic, Snipes, Shneepz, Sneepz, Shnee-Pez, and Snee-pez.

"They are in front of us, behind us, and we are flanked on both sides by an enemy that outnumbers us 29:1. They can't get away from us now !" - "Chesty" Puller


killer etzi0 #76 Posted 19 April 2017 - 02:06 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 59671 battles
  • 19,159
  • [47R]
  • Member since:
    06-20-2014

View PostNiles Y93, on 03 April 2017 - 08:27 AM, said:

Uhhhh, I think you have the wrong war. This is talking about WWI, not WWII.

 

Hence my post earlier in the thread. I also miss-read it the first time. Caught myself before making a goofy none accurate post.

"When you can't make them see the light, make them feel the heat."

 

Ronald Reagan
 

 


NSW Mntd Rifles #77 Posted 24 April 2017 - 01:31 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 39337 battles
  • 595
  • Member since:
    02-15-2014
http://themetapictur...as-a-bar-fight/

NeoSpearBlade #78 Posted 04 May 2017 - 03:07 PM

    Corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 24396 battles
  • 90
  • Member since:
    12-02-2013

From reading this, it sounds like the Allies would've won anyway without America getting involved but the end of the war would not have been on November 1918. Probably.

 

I'm not much into history but I find stuff like this interesting.

 

View PostCrazedtiger77:

would you like to see this to become a series challenging misconceptions about the World Wars?

I found this interesting so yes, I would like to see this become a series. Personally, I would like to see one on "How much of an impact America had on WWII."


Color Identifiers: [Normal Tank] [Progress-To-Tier-X Tank] [Elite Tank] [Premium Tank]

My Garage (03/21/2018): T1 Cunningham, Leichttraktor, Vickers Medium Mk. I, T1E6-X, T2 Light Tank, T7 Combat Car, Pz.Kpfw. 38H 735 (f), Pz.Kpfw. II Ausf. D, Tetrarch, Te-Ke Ashigaru, Strv m/38, M22 Locust, MTLS-1G14 Blitzen, Pz.Kpfw. T 15, BT-7A Raseiniai, BT-SV, T-127, Pz.Kpfw. S35 739 (f), SU-26, AC I Sentinel Vanquisher, T-28E F-30 Honor, Birch Gun, M4A2E4 Sherman, Pz.Kpfw. V/IV, Pz.Kpfw. T 25, T14, 60G FT, Ikv 103, T37, Cromwell Snakebite, M4A3E8 Sherman, M4A3E8 Sherman Fury, Cromwell Knight, M4 Sherman Firefly Boilermaker, Churchill VII British Bulldog, TOG II*, KV-2, O-I Kaiju, T23E3, Pz.Kpfw. V Panther Revenant Kraft, Pz.Kpfw. VI Tiger I 131, Pz.Kpfw. VI Tiger I Hammer, M41B Walker Bulldog Brazilian, T26E4 SuperPershing Freedom, T-54 first prototype Motherland, AMX Chasseur de chars, IS-3A Fatherland, FCM 50 t Liberté, O-Ho, AT 15, M46 Patton, T95, Waffenträger auf Pz. IV, M53/M55, Pz.Kpfw. VIII Maus

Wish List: Großtraktor - Krupp, Matilda Defiance, KV-220-2 Bogatyr, AC IV Experimental Sentinel, T-34-85M HMH, Škoda T 40 Žižka, T71 DA Lycan, Type 62 Dragon, Comet Banshee, VK 45.03 Adler, leKpz M 41 90 mm Höllenhund, M46 Patton KR, T25 Vengeance, Centurion Huntsman HMH, Chieftain/T95 Centennial, M51 Super Sherman HMH, Edelweiss, STA-2 Senshi, Type 59 King Dragon, Strv 81 Primo Victoria, T26E5 Patriot, IS-5 (Object 730) Glory, KV-5 Gorynych, Object 252U Defender, AMX M4 mle. 49 HMH, The Nameless, WZ-111 Alpine Tiger, Charioteer Vindicator, M48A1 Patton, Type 5 Heavy, Grille 15, Waffenträger auf E 100, FV215b (183), T92 HMC

#TVTropesWillRuinYourLife


FaeWraith113 #79 Posted 18 May 2017 - 10:05 PM

    Private

  • Players
  • 12950 battles
  • 7
  • [DFTU]
  • Member since:
    07-11-2015

View PostSqn Ldr B, on 29 May 2016 - 09:19 PM, said:

 

But a poor start is not being pre-emptive. Being pre-emptive is being well prepared. You're not well prepared if you get completely clobbered in the first year.

 

Hey now, that is a proud U.S.A. tradition.  We got clobbered early in the revolution, probably should have lost the War of 1812, got our rear's handed to us in the early going of the American Civil War, and got sucker punched at the start of the Spanish American War.  Heck, we had to go start some stuff in Central American for the banana companies just to rack up some easy wins.  We hung back for WWI and then again got smacked at Belleau Wood and other battles.  Pearl Harbor and the Kasserine pass were our entrance into WWII.  Ever hear of the Pusan Perimeter, that about covers the American initial contribution in Korea. Thank goodness for Colonel Moore or our start in Vietnam would have followed the theme and we lost that one.  Maybe that's the key, we need to loose early and then win. Shock and Awe started a decade of waste in the Desert.  See what I'm saying?

 


Edited by FaeWraith113, 18 May 2017 - 11:02 PM.


NSW Mntd Rifles #80 Posted 21 May 2017 - 10:03 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 39337 battles
  • 595
  • Member since:
    02-15-2014

View PostBigDaddyKTx, on 03 April 2017 - 12:54 PM, said:

 

Well put sir! Morale boosting and such. On a side note, I've seen several excellent Aussie films depicting Australia's involvement in conflicts from the late 19th/early 20th century. Breaker Morant, which I believe was about the Boer wars in South Africa, Gallipoli and The Lighthorsemen, immediately come to mind. All excellent films!

 

No worries. They are all good movies. Other excellent Australian war films are: 

 

  • Beneath Hill 60 - Set in World War I. A story of the tunnellers who set explosives beneath German entrenchments.
  • The Water Diviner - Set in the aftermath of the Gallipoli campaign in World War I.
  • Kokoda - World War II. Follows the story of the Australian Militia units that fought a strategic retreat against a far superior Japanese force in Papua New Guinea.

 

There are also some good vintage movies:

 

  • 40,000 Horsemen - A 1940 production about the charge at Beersheba.
  • The Rats of Tobruk - A 1944 story of the 9th Division AIF and the Siege of Tobruk.
  • The Overlanders - A postwar movie about the implementation of the scorched earth policy in Northern Australia under the threat of Japanese invasion in 1942.

 

I also love:

 

  • A Town Like Alice (The original black & white starring Peter Finch & Virginia McKenna) - The Japanese invasion of Malaya and its aftermath.

 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users