Originally posted by Shuckins
The final push that placed the Allies near the German border late in 1918 would not have been possible without American military might.
The British and French armies, which had fought valiantly for four years, had been bled white. The U.S. military had at it's disposal nearly 5 million men, of which around 1 million were combat troops. U.S. casualties from the summer of 1918 until the armistice totalled more than 300,000 men.
At the current casualty rate, the war in Iraq would have to rage for 300 years to match that total.
Amusing as it is this continous reposting of the same french military cowardly themes, I know if I would were French - I would find it offensive that some would claim america "saved" france in WW1.
Considering the causalties the french incurred in that war France was still a fighting force in 1918 up to the armistace.
The influx of american soldiers were vital, but they were really were plugs in the line and bullet soakers just like everyone else in the allied armies until late 1918 when the germans exhausted themsleves trying to redress the unbalance the impending american divisions would cause.
American divisions were often used to support experienced Allied units because of the inexperience of the american forces. Companies of american soldiers were attached to australian divisions to gain vital battlefield craft and so "jerry wouldn't have them for breakfast".
eg. The final attacks by the Australian corps on the hindenberg line in october before the final german collapse, the 2 american divisions used to support the main attack were given australian nco's because of they were too green.
Tronsky
