Ok so I’m by far an expert on world wars but from I understand, America did play a rather isolationist position prior to pearl harbor. We can agree that politically America had some pull on things going on in Europe but they didn’t actively put boots on the ground until shit got really close. Giving others weapons to fight with is one thing. Sacrificing your own lives for the world is a different one
If it wasn’t for the supply shipments to Britain, they likely would have lost before things got close in the first place. Note it wasn’t just weapons but also food and medical supplies.
Edit: Also, the shipments were regularly attacked by German U-boats, so there absolutely was risk to American lives still.
Yes WW2 started in 1939, and Pearl Harbor was in december 1941. So it took 2 years for USA to get involved. But USA was such a massive influence, because their industrial output was without comparison bigger than anything else in the world. It was bigger than Europe combined. USA was also a major factor in keeping the trans Atlantic traffic open, and defeating the German submarines. D-Day would have been impossible without USA, as USA was the biggest force. USA also suffered the most losses in operation overlord, with almost twice the casualties and killed as UK. All that is apart from doing by far the most in the effort against Japan.
Some would say 1935, with the invasion of Ethiopia. There’s also a large body of historians who view WW1 and WW2 as being a single event. To sort of piggy-back off my above reply, the idea that WW2 “began” in 1939 is as Anglocentric as Americans thinking it started in 1941.
I’ve always just seen 1939 as the beginning of WW2, and I’ve never seen it questioned since I learned about it in school in the 70’s. But maybe it’s seen different in Asia. And yes we also learned about the truce that was forced on the Germans, so that’s been taken into account all along. It’s still WWI and WW2, not WWI 1914-1945.
If you want an interesting novel, try ‘Night Soldiers’ by Alan Furst. Young Bulgarian boy is killed by local fascists. His brother is then recruited by the Russians to be a spy. He’s sent to Spain to help fight Franco. Enjoy.
they didn’t actively put boots on the ground until shit got really close.
False comparison. There was no alternative to “boots on the ground” for the European Allies when the war happened in their backyard, but there was certainly an alternative to the U.S. offering a quarter-trillion dollars (adjusted) in aid to Europe.
Ok so I’m by far an expert on world wars but from I understand, America did play a rather isolationist position prior to pearl harbor. We can agree that politically America had some pull on things going on in Europe but they didn’t actively put boots on the ground until shit got really close. Giving others weapons to fight with is one thing. Sacrificing your own lives for the world is a different one
If it wasn’t for the supply shipments to Britain, they likely would have lost before things got close in the first place. Note it wasn’t just weapons but also food and medical supplies.
Edit: Also, the shipments were regularly attacked by German U-boats, so there absolutely was risk to American lives still.
Yes WW2 started in 1939, and Pearl Harbor was in december 1941. So it took 2 years for USA to get involved. But USA was such a massive influence, because their industrial output was without comparison bigger than anything else in the world. It was bigger than Europe combined. USA was also a major factor in keeping the trans Atlantic traffic open, and defeating the German submarines. D-Day would have been impossible without USA, as USA was the biggest force. USA also suffered the most losses in operation overlord, with almost twice the casualties and killed as UK. All that is apart from doing by far the most in the effort against Japan.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Overlord
It’s denigrating to the American effort to call that waltzing in.
Some people would say that WW2 started when Japan invaded China.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_during_World_War_II
Some would say 1935, with the invasion of Ethiopia. There’s also a large body of historians who view WW1 and WW2 as being a single event. To sort of piggy-back off my above reply, the idea that WW2 “began” in 1939 is as Anglocentric as Americans thinking it started in 1941.
Supposedly, Foch said the WW1 Armistice wasn’t peace, it was a 20 year truce.
Maybe, but the traditional view is 1939.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II
Funny how different countries have different traditions.
I’ve always just seen 1939 as the beginning of WW2, and I’ve never seen it questioned since I learned about it in school in the 70’s. But maybe it’s seen different in Asia. And yes we also learned about the truce that was forced on the Germans, so that’s been taken into account all along. It’s still WWI and WW2, not WWI 1914-1945.
If you want an interesting novel, try ‘Night Soldiers’ by Alan Furst. Young Bulgarian boy is killed by local fascists. His brother is then recruited by the Russians to be a spy. He’s sent to Spain to help fight Franco. Enjoy.
Britain did play a rather isolationist position prior to the invasion of Poland. It’s just a feature of diplomacy to avoid armed conflict at all costs. Kind of like when Britain secured “peace for our time” by offering Czechoslovakia to Hitler as a Sacrificial Lamb..
False comparison. There was no alternative to “boots on the ground” for the European Allies when the war happened in their backyard, but there was certainly an alternative to the U.S. offering a quarter-trillion dollars (adjusted) in aid to Europe.
The US Merchant Marines were sinking German U-boats nearly a year before the US declared war.
Yeah they wanted the UK to give it all its patents first. They got paid off.