History from the perspective of Europe?

[Laddies]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

RPJS, I don't thing this post started to bash a member of any countrys armed forces and it certainly points out the feeling of patriotism we all feel, but personal I take exception when the sacrifices of the American or that fact any other mititary troops is down played but the libral veiws of the educaters of our children. I think the "Hollywood veiw" of any war is deplorable, but not anymore deplorable than to say that the Amercan troop played a minor part in WW II and only shortened the war. Get Real---Bob---As as a after thought to the remarks that the blue blooded english men thought were cute, the yank said the problem with the English was "There were to many Counts and Noaccounts there"

 

[Nos4r2]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

No, we couldn't have done it without the Yanks.<br /><br />But the Yanks couldn't have done it on their own either.<br /><br />As for the French, Belgian and Dutch, how many pictures do they have in their museums or history books of their own troops liberating their own countries...?

 

[dogsdad]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

If European kids are saying the US had a minor role in the liberation of Europe, then there is no doubt they are being taught revisionist history. Although American forces entered Europe relatively late in the war, those forces played crucial roles and paid dearly and in large numbers. It must be remembered that the Germans and Japanese were operating as a team, and the US was heavily engaged in the Pacific. America was fighting on two fronts much as the Germans were.<br /><br />Another point I would make is that America was providing some very important support to the Allies in Europe long before sending forces in.<br /><br />The British contribution was vital, the price of the Russian contribution was staggering, and the American effort was essential in ending the war as early as it did happen. Without the Russians, the Americans and British could not have been as effective as they were...and without the Americans or the British, the Russians could not have stopped Hitler. The absence of ANY of these players would have drastically altered the outcome and the the date that it came.<br /><br />History books that depict the history of WWII any differently are simply not accurate.<br /><br /><br />-dd-

 

[Vlad D Impeller]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

Well said dd

 

[Laddies]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

dogsdad, right on

 

[Vlad D Impeller]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

btw IF the jerries had won that war one would've more and likely been shot for telling a blonde <br />joke

 

[rodbolt]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

history is usually taught regardless of fact. I spent many hours in the deans office due to dissagreements with the "facts" as presented in high school history. Roosevelt tried to get in the war in europe as ealy as 39. had Hitler not declared war on the US in 42 odds are britain would have gone down in flames however valiant the RAF. however they did and we did and the rest is history. by 44 we were about the only alleid country with raw materiel,oil,stell lead and the unbomed well fed labor pool to build things. while its nice to see hollywoods version of guts and glory we won by out manufacturing the axis capeability to destroy. in other words we could replace it faster than they could destroy it. the liberty ship program is a shining example.but it does seem that each country has a diffent history book.and each "history" seems to leave out facts.

 

[62_Kiwi]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

If you've been following what's been happening between China and Japan recently, you'll know that the Japanese have completely "white-washed" Japan's activities in their history textbooks of WWII and the period prior. <br /><br />Most Japanese kids don't have a clue about the atrocities their forefathers comitted against their neighbours. <br /><br />Recently, this has quite rightly caused outrage with the Chinese people - and one of the very few instances where the Chinese government has allowed it's people to openly protest.<br /><br />Regarding the American involvement in WWII - I don't recall being taught much in school about WWII at all. I have since done my own research over the years and am fully aware of which countries contributed and to what extent. Britain and her allies (including NZ, who was the next country to declare war on Germany immediately after Britain) bore the brunt of it in the early stages - and overall Germany was winning. Once America (and the Russians) joined in - the tables turned very quickly on Hitler. The American contribution was of course gigantic.<br /><br />Something that saddens me, is that I don't think the majority of younger Kiwis realise or recognise that America (in particular the USN) saved NZ (and other countries in this region) from the nightmare of Japanese invasion. You'll know that "Nightmare" is an understatement if you've ever researched what the Japanese did to the local people when they invaded a country.<br /><br />These days, too many people are quick to label America as the aggressor in our world. I believe they are largely ignorant of America's contribution to world stability - and that must be blamed on what they are being taught (or not taught) in school and the news media.

 

[Boomyal]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

Originally posted by 62_Kiwi:<br /> These days, too many people are quick to label America as the aggressor in our world. I believe they are largely ignorant of America's contribution to world stability - and that must be blamed on what they are being taught (or not taught) in school and the news media.

Thank you 62! A mite arrogant perhaps we are, imperialistic we are not.<br /><br />On the WWII scene, what is often overlooked, is that were it not for American participation prior to officially entering the war, the victory might well have gone to Germany. It was the Americans who guarded the convoys to keep the British in fuel, food and ammunition that kept a German victory at bay. <br /><br />It was American supplies sent to Russia that filled the gap while the Russians had to tear down their factories and move them out of harms way.<br /><br />Without this American involvement, the European issue might well have been resolved even before Pearl Harbor.

 

[Boomyal]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

Originally posted by Tinkerer:<br /> In case Boomyal thinks that my appreciation of Americans is boundless, I'll remind him of what our and English troops said of American troops during WWII. "There's only three things wrong with Americans. They're over paid; over sexed; and over here."

Oh, wound my soft American heart Tinkerer!<br />Build me up, then slam me down hard.

 

[neilmw]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

Well to answer the original question, I was never taught anything other than that the US played a major role in wwII in the final years and very appreciative of that fact, it takes courage and determination to fight for countries thousands of miles from the shores of your own.<br />There may have been other political issues for the US intervention, however it happened, thank God. <br />In my humble opinion the US intervined for the same reasons we did, remember GB declared war on Germany when it refused to pull out from Poland, Hitler never wanted to go to war with us, he was forced, futhermore he wanted to make a deal with Winston over Europe. Yes tis true that after the total domination of the Euorpean continent the chances were that he may have at some point decide to invade GB,nevertheless we got stuck in and with the help of the US and many other countries from the commonwealth we kicked his ***! as you say over the pond. However I think you will find that we may still be repaying the us financially.......<br />Either way Thanks guys, you truley a bunch of "Diamond Geezers"

 

[neilmw]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

Here, i just thought, maybe if we didnt have to pay you lot back I might not have to pay £4.00 for a gallon of squirt !!!!!<br />

 

[cbnoodles]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

Originally posted by Neil.M.W:<br /> Here, i just thought, maybe if we didnt have to pay you lot back I might not have to pay £4.00 for a gallon of squirt !!!!!<br />

Not to worry, Neil. We're catching up with you at a fairly rapid clip. Even though there is still a large gap in ours versus yours, our prices have gone up dramatically and continue to do so.<br /><br />What is the "Diamond Geezers" reference? I don't recall ever hearing my Dad refer to that before.

 

[steve n carol]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

Noodles wrote... <br /><br />"I don't recall ever hearing my Dad refer to that before."<br /><br />That's because you wrote.."I very clearly stated on the CONTINENT."<br /><br />...also wrote..."Always say what you mean and always mean what you say!"

 

[steve n carol]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

Now, back to the topic at hand, and EXCUSE me if I get off of the continent....as this was a WW. <br />you don't have to read on, I am not over 50 either, I am 50 though.<br /><br />I was VERY good and informative for me to read all of the previous thread/replys above. Of course I was not there. I was an officers, (USMC) son but never served. I wished I would have. <br /><br />I am not European, never been there, have no desire to go there. And I don't know what is taught there in there schools...I can only imagine. Good grief the way they want to change our history books here, and we are suppose to be rightous? God forbid. <br /><br />Noodles, it's an interesting topic. I glad your father is still here to tell you/us "his"-"story".<br /><br />Thanks guys for helping me to get a better understanding of what may or may not have happened. I liked the numbers that were posted. That helps put it in perspective to me.<br /><br />Noddles, I suggest that you start a new thread on the same subject, but you might want the input from those over 70 years old. (NOT being funny). <br /><br />I suppose that The Brits had to give It all they had, being as close and affected as they were, fear is an awsome motivatior. I suppose any country in their position would do the same.<br /><br />In Vietnam, Where I was not, There was a saying by the oppisition..that the G.I. was/is soft. Why did they say that?<br /><br />Thanks again guys...sl

 

[cbnoodles]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

Originally posted by steve n carol:<br /> Noodles wrote... <br /><br />"I don't recall ever hearing my Dad refer to that before."<br /><br />That's because you wrote.."I very clearly stated on the CONTINENT."<br /><br />...also wrote..."Always say what you mean and always mean what you say!"

Steve or Carol,<br /><br />Sorry, maybe it's just my engineering mindset, but you lost me completely with this. Please explain.

 

[JB]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

Hmmm. Our kids get revisionist history, too.<br /><br />How many people actually believe that the Civil War started over slavery?<br /><br />The Allies wouldn't have won WWII in the way they did without the UK, Australia and NZ, nor they without the USA.

 

[cbnoodles]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

Originally posted by steve n carol:<br />Noddles, I suggest that you start a new thread on the same subject, but you might want the input from those over 70 years old. (NOT being funny). <br />

Not taken as a joke at all. The reason I asked for input from the under-50 crowd in Europe was my interest in how extensive this phenomenon is. I specifically excluded the over-70 bunch because I was pretty certain their view would, for the most part, agree with my Dad's (and my British Mom's too for that matter).<br /><br />As they were both there to live through the experience, I'm inclined to believe they have no reason to lie to me. I think my parents would have told me that the people on the continent extricated themselves from the German stranglehold if that were the case.<br /><br />My father has never been one to talk about it that much let alone brag but he's not so humble as to give all the credit to someone else either. I will only say that being the son of a B17 pilot who saw many of his fellow servicemen die or crash to become P.O.W.'s, it nearly brings me to tears to think there are those who would discount America's participation in Europe.

 

[Tinkerer]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

Originally posted by RPJS:<br />

There's also the minor point that the troops coming out of the landing craft were often American. If the Yanks weren't running up the beaches it would have been a lonely party for the remaining British.<br />

Tinkerer.<br /><br />There were more British forces landed on the Normandy beaches than US<br /><br />83,000 British<br />73,000 US <br /><br />The US forces had the hardest time landing on Omaha beach where the 1st & 29th divisions suffered 2000 casualties.<br /><br />There were 11,590 planes supporting the landings of which<br /><br />7544 British<br />3630 US<br />416 RCAF<br /><br />There were 195,700 men on board the ships in addition to the landing forces of which<br /><br />112,700 British<br /> 52,889 US<br /> 4,988 From other allied countries<br /><br />The British did have a "small part"

RPJS<br /><br />Sorry if my ironic language caused you to think I was dismissive of the British contribution to the liberation of Europe.<br /><br />My forebears went to war with Germany the same day yours did. Both times. <br /><br />If you remember Steptoe and Son there is a glorious scene where old man Steptoe is returning to visit his WWI battlefields and gets into a dispute, which an American comes into after a while in an attempt to be a peacemaker. Old man Steptoe exclaims something like: "Here's the Yanks. Late as bloody usual!".<br /><br />For reasons of domestic politics the Yanks might have been late both times, but we should be bloody grateful they came at all. Contrary to your view that Germany would have been defeated without them (which I'm prepared to argue on both tactical and strategic grounds), it's likely that Germany (whose troops pound for pound beat the tripe out of anyone else's) would have prevailed.<br /><br />But the undeniable facts, as other have pointed out, are that Britain would have been in dire straits without the materiel provided by the US long before it was formally at war. My recollection is also that during the same period the US Coast Guard, without going to war, made some useful contributions to the war against the German submarines which Churchill regarded as one of the greatest threats to England's survival.<br /><br />When the Yanks arrived in both wars their energy and materiel and courage and troops changed the course of both wars. Maybe WWI could have been won without them, around 1926. Not WWII.<br /><br />Nobody is suggesting that the Yanks won or could have won the European, or for that matter the Pacific war, by themselves. They couldn't.<br /><br />Neither could any of the other major forces in those theatres have got an unconditional surrender from both Germany and Japan.<br /><br />But it remains that the Yanks made major contributions to the landings in Sicily, Salerno and Anzio. As they did in Normandy. And all the subsequent battles leading to Germany's defeat.<br /><br />The OP was that youngsters in Europe believe that the US (NOT the UK) played a minor role in WWII in Europe. In fact the US played a major and decisive role, as rows and rows of American soldiers' graves in lots of cemeteries in Europe will attest.

 

[RPJS]

Re: History from the perspective of Europe?

I have come across another reason for teenagers today not being taught the truth regarding the war.<br /><br />My wife is a professional caberet singer and was booked to entertain at a St Georges day party last night, the night was billed as a patriotic celebration. Some weeks ago my wife supplied the venue with a comprehensive song sheet with lyrics to the songs she intended singing, the idea being that the list could be duplicated and given to the audiance to encourage them to "sing along". On arrival at the venue we discovered that a significant number of titles had been removed from the list, the explanation was that the bosses at the brewery that own the venue had decided that certain titles were not "politicly correct" and may offend.<br /><br />Included in the censored songs were "Rule Britania" and "There will Always be an England". I would rate this on a par with Americans being told not to sing "Stars and Stripes Forever"<br /><br />If this sort of attitude is adopted when teaching it is hardly supprising that the true facts of the war have been manipulated.