"UK settles WWII debts to allies"

[Masherbrum]

Originally posted by Holden McGroin

Sicily was a cakewalk.   Throw in Anzio, Naples and Monte Cassino, Sicily is long forgotten.

[Angus]

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
That the USA alone out produced the Axis 3 to 1 in total war material and was producer of 5/8 of the allied production in from 1938 to 1945 may have had something to do with the outcome of the war.

Detroit was the front line.

I'd really like to see the numbers for this.
Axis is basically Germany, Italy and Japan, along with their sattelite nations.
 Allied count as UK + Commonwealth, USSR and then USA (In the order of enter) as well as those who fell, Poland, France, the Lowlands etc.
What counts as war material? And what period of production?
I allow myself to doubt these numbers, and suggest that they're out of context. When dealing with WWII statistics and the top usage & production, it turns out roughly like:
Aircraft: USSR then USA, closely followed by the UK
Tanks: USSR then UK or USA?
Navy: USA and closely by UK.
Steel? Oil? Cloth? Transport? I still don't get this to add up as a that high war material percentage vs the Axis, nor the absolue 5/8 (alarm, the USSR is in there!).
As for the whole war effort, the frigging percentage is somewhere, not so major maybe, but....very....IMPORTANT

[cpxxx]

Well done Britain, they paid off every cent they owed the USA. Well done the USA. Without the USA, who knows what the world would be like now.
The British always do what's right in the end.

Don't spoil it.

No one can really thank the USA for the sacrifice of the men who died for our freedom. We can thank them for their money and we can repay them.

I speak as someone who lived in a country whose leaders lacked the vision to make the right decision, yet produced eight Victoria Cross winners and who instinctively knew where right lay.

[Masherbrum]

Originally posted by Kurt
At the time of D-day?  The war was practically over.

The deciding point was 1940 in the battle of Britain.  When someone talks about a German invasion of England they are talking about 1940, NOT 1944.

Sure, by 1944 when D-day happens it is a downhill slide for Germany, but the point here is that D-day wouldn't have happened without an Allied England.  Because we needed air superiority to do it, and we didn't have anywhere else from which to field a large airforce.

You do realize that D-day was near the end of the war, not the beginning, right?

If NOT the BoB, it was definately the Allies turning the tables on the U-Boats towards the Autumn of 42.  

But excellent post Kurt.

[john9001]

the numbers are here:

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/weapons_and_manpower.htm

[fd ski]

Originally posted by Angus
You can call some 50 years of cold war "spineless" if it pleases you.
What would have been the alternative? A land warfare between former allies which would have outscaled WW2 by a vaste amount?
Anyway, if you bring the focus down to Poland only, guess what. At Yalta (or was it Teheran?), Churchill was the only of 3 leaders to insist that Poland was to be a sovereign state at the war's end, while Stalin did not agree. The point of pivot was the U.S., with Roosevelt (already failing in health) at the steer.
Churchill lost. But he sure had the spine.

Excellent post. Hats off. You are absolutely correct. In the statesmen world, it was the alcoholic bastard Churchill who turned out to be the only honest man of them all, with morals and spine to show for it.

Roosevelt on the other hand was as cold and calculating as Stalin, and at the same time very "happy go lucky" when giving away what's not his.

Kinda makes me wonder every time I drive down the Roosevelt Ave in Warsaw that there isn't a Churchill one...

[Hazzer]

The war against nazi germany was won on the eastern front and at stalingrad in particular and it was paid for in russian blood who not only fought Hitler  but had to suffer stalin and the nkvd as well...the western front in comparison was a sideshow and a more civilised war....a timely reminder;)

[Angus]

Originally posted by fd ski
Excellent post. Hats off. You are absolutely correct. In the statesmen world, it was the alcoholic bastard Churchill who turned out to be the only honest man of them all, with morals and spine to show for it.

Roosevelt on the other hand was as cold and calculating as Stalin, and at the same time very "happy go lucky" when giving away what's not his.

Kinda makes me wonder every time I drive down the Roosevelt Ave in Warsaw that there isn't a Churchill one...

Call it what you please, but if you look at history this actually happened.
The US did NOT back up the Brits demand upon keping Poland as a sovereign state when Germany was defeated. PUNKTUM. (PERIOD)
Roosevelt was at the time, neither cold nor calculating IMHO. He was wearing himself out and not up to the strain for this one vs. uncle Joe. So, Winnie didn't have his vote. There was one who wanted Poland to absolutely stay as a sovereign state, and that was old "alcoholic" Winnie.
Stalin, of course, didn't want any Poland at all ....
As for Roosevelt, IMHO he deserved many an avenue none the less.
He really did lots of political maneuvers that are manifested in history as brilliant.
Anyway, happy new years to you all, and the hat off for F.D.Roosevelt!

[Torque]

perspective... the population of canada at the time was a mere 12.5 million.

[Kurt]

Originally posted by Torque
perspective... the population of canada at the time was a mere 12.5 million.

Good ol' Canada, "we were there too, you just forgot"...  just trying to remain relevant. hehe.

J/K Torque, I love you harmless Canadians

[Excel1]

Originally posted by Torque
perspective... the population of canada at the time was a mere 12.5 million.

Canada punched well above it's weight in both fighting and training airmen

130,000 commonwealth airmen, more than half of them Canadian, trained in Canada during the war under the commonwealth air training plan was an enormous achievment and crucial to the war effort.

Canada

[Shuckins]

Team effort all the way.

Without Britain, there would have been no base from which to launch the invasion of Europe.

Without the United States, there would have been NO invasion of Europe, period.

Without the Soviet Union, Germany could have deployed 60 divisions or more in the west to crush any cross-channel invasion.

Without a team effort, the war against Germany would have been prolonged, allowing Hitler's scientists to develop the atomic bomb....and ultimately dominate all of Europe.

[Bronk]

A little more info to think about dug up from another thread.

Originally posted by Widewing
The Soviets didn't buy anything...They were GIVEN vast amounts of equipment, material and food. If you research the type and volume of lend-lease "stuff" sent to the USSR, you will be astounded.

Here's some examples of what the USA supplied to the Soviets:

77,900 Jeeps
151,000 light trucks
202,000 2 1/2 ton trucks
956,000 miles of telephone cable
380,000 field phones
35,000 command radio sets
99% of all locomotives used
95% of all railroad rolling stock used
95% of all railroad rails and switches
70% of all avgas of 100 octane or higher
Enough food to feed one daily meal to every soldier that served during the entire war.

This list is huge. Critical steels and rare metals, the vast majority of machine tools and manufacturing equipment. Enough M4 Shermans to fully equip two full armored divisions.

I haven't even mentioned aircraft, or medical supplies, or gun powders and explosives... The US manufactured and delivered 495 million rounds of Soviet small arms ammunition.

The USA basically supplied the Soviets with their industrial base for the first 10 years of the cold war.

Britain contributed as well, but only a small fraction of what the US sent over.
 
Like I said, research the incredible volume of "stuff" given to the Soviets and you will find it simply jaw dropping.

My regards,

Widewing

Bronk

[lukster]

Originally posted by fd ski
Excellent post. Hats off. You are absolutely correct. In the statesmen world, it was the alcoholic bastard Churchill who turned out to be the only honest man of them all, with morals and spine to show for it.

Roosevelt on the other hand was as cold and calculating as Stalin, and at the same time very "happy go lucky" when giving away what's not his.

Kinda makes me wonder every time I drive down the Roosevelt Ave in Warsaw that there isn't a Churchill one...

What, no Reagan Ave?

[storch]

Originally posted by lukster
What, no Reagan Ave?

try the ronald reagan turnpike, avenue indeed.  he gets a road eight lanes wide in many places and people pay to drive on it.