[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/his/ - History & Humanities


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: yalta2.jpg (78 KB, 579x439)
78 KB JPG
You always see Britain, America, and the USSR held up as the Big Three of the second world war, but was Britain really the equal of the other two?
>>
Britain was like the helpful little brother of the USA during the Second World War. They both collaborated with eachother pretty significantly, such as during the Manhattan Project for example.
>>
>>18482492
50% of D-Day ground forces were British
80% of the D-Day naval forces used for the operation were British

So yes the Commonwealth was still a major component to the western allies.
>>
>>18482492
It was literally the world's largest empire but it just sucked, like the HRE during the Napoleonic Wars
>>
>>18482492
Britain was not the equal to the US or Soviet Union, but it definitely outmatched Germany on its own. At that time Britain had a huge domestic industrial base, the world's most powerful navy, and the largest empire in human history. They were being heavily subsidized by America though, same as the Soviets, and that's one reason why their empire split apart almost immediately after the war, and Britain wisely decided not to try and hold it together by force and end up in disastrous colonial forever wars, the way France and Portugal did. But that's just to say we shouldn't view wartime Britain through the lens of what came after.
>>
>>18482509
>50% of D-Day ground forces were British

They were bait to hold the Germans in place while the US got ashore and actually defeated the Germans.

>80% of the D-Day naval forces used for the operation were British

Britbongs always bring up muh Royal Navy!, as if it mattered when the Germans had essentially no navy to counter it and even then, it was American Liberty ships that brought in the supplies which were protected by American anti-sub destroyers.

Meanwhile in the Pacific where a navy mattered, it was all the US.
>>
>>18482590
You forgot the RAF
>>
>>18482590
>They were bait to hold the Germans in place while the US got ashore
not really. the British and Canadians faced the bulk of Wehrmacht forces for the most part until the end of Normandy. Most of Germany's best units in Northern France were used to stall the Commonwealth advance towards Caen. After that American influence rose in proportion to the British Commonwealth's huge manpower crisis that only got worse and worse though.
>>
File: 1777941060927757.jpg (91 KB, 1280x720)
91 KB JPG
>>18482492
Well obviously no, Britain alone simply cannot physically equal 2 continent sized countries and by the 1940s the Empire (which is really just India + other small little bonuses acquired to protect the route to India) was coming apart at the seams due to nationalism awakening independence movements.
Nevertheless, it was the British Empire which permitted the Allies to project power more effectively in the Middle East, Pacific, etc. as they were dependent on British Dominions and Colonies like Australia, Egypt, India, etc... in order to coordinate shit globally (like the US flying in supplies to China via India, the massive US presence in Brisbane and Melbourne during the Pacific War, the joint Anglo-Soviet occupation of Iran, etc)
>>
>>18482492
Only until about late 1942 while the US was still in the process of re-arming. After that they were undeniably a junior partner.
>>
>>18482590
Quick question? What happened when the first liberty ships set sail and what did the Germans call this period?
>>
>>18482492
No.

Their incompetence cause the war to go on for an extra year. Britbongs will seethe and dilate about it, but they were more of a liability than anything else. Even Canada played a bigger role.
>>
>>18482688
nah. i'm a leaf and by no metric did we play a bigger role, except taking over a huge portion of the convoy escort duties in the Western part of the Atlantic early in the war when the RN was hardpressed.
>>
>>18482688
what are you referring to here? I know of disasters like the Dodecanese campaign, but they hardly could be said to prolong the war for a year
>>
>>18482688
>Even Canada played a bigger role
Canada was literally only even involved because of the British lmao why the fuck do you think a North American country would've declared war on Germany in fucking 1939 over Poland?
>>
>>18482590
US suffered heavy losses because they fucked up. The landing force was pinned down at Omaha Beach and behind Utah Beach, it was the paratroopers that were decimated.
British forces failed to take its objective (Caen was supposed to be captured day one, was unrealistic) but otherwise, it went much more smoothly so no need to make a Saving Private Ryan for PR purpose.
>>
>>18482688
Holy shit, you were right
>>
>>18482492
The Brits were holding it from the beginning till the end and they fought 8 out of 10 of German panzer divisions in Normandy.
The mutts were just factory workers pretending that they were fighting the war. Like those German women which were replacing German men (needed to do the actual fighting) in factory jobs.
>>
>>18482706
Because we were on the right side of history
>>
>>18482492
Britain provided time, USA equipment and USSR soldiers



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.