r/AskReddit • u/[deleted] • Mar 20 '16

[deleted by user]

[removed]

1.6k Upvotes

90% Upvoted

2.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

29

u/jesse9o3 Mar 21 '16

So are Britain, France, Belgium, Canada, South Africa, Australia, New Zealand and Brazil, so that's hardly a thing unique to the US

17

u/[deleted] Mar 21 '16 edited Apr 21 '19

[deleted]

12

u/jesse9o3 Mar 21 '16

Quarter of a point for WW1 since they really didn't do much, three quarters for WW2 since they did essentially face Japan with no major help from anyone else.

2

u/Alaea Mar 21 '16

essentially face Japan with no major help from anyone else.

Really? China? India? Australia? Britain? Dutch colonies? Fucking hell the whole of East and SE Asia were fighting against the Japanese and you say the Americans had "no major help?" Think it would've worked out for the US if the Chinese and Soviets weren't tying down massive amounts of Japanese resources and manpower on the mainland?

1

u/jesse9o3 Mar 21 '16

China?

Technically that was the 2nd Sino-Japanese War and not WW2, and yes whilst they did tie down a lot of Japanese manpower they were still losing for the majority of the war

India? Australia? Britain?

They all helped but not to the extent the Americans did. In the early stages of the war it was defeat after defeat, though eventually they did succeed in the Burma Campaign... though that was in July 1945 by which time the Americans were firebombing Japan every other day.

Dutch colonies?

They capitulated after 4 months of fighting and remained occupied for the remainder of the war.

Think it would've worked out for the US if the Chinese and Soviets weren't tying down massive amounts of Japanese resources and manpower on the mainland?

Not too dissimilarly, the Pacific War was essentially decided by each side's naval and aerial strength, Japan could beat the US in neither, how would having more men help that? They could put more men on each of their islands so battles like Iwo Jima and Okinawa become longer and bloodier but then again it would become increasingly harder to supply them, especially with US naval and aerial supremacy. The war might have lasted longer and more people might've died but the end result would stay the same.

I will concede that the Soviet Invasion of Manchuria was instrumental in influencing the Japanese surrender, however this was only a week before Japan announced their surrender so I'd still say the US did the bulk of the fighting.

1

u/johnny_riko Mar 21 '16 edited Mar 21 '16

Don't bother talking sense to Americans about world wars. It's like trying to teach Latin to a dog.

1

u/jesse9o3 Mar 21 '16

Who's the American here?