"Why is it that every war America fights, they lose"?

[Renmiri]

My partner wants to know, "Why is it that every war America fights, they lose"?
He adds, "They were only on the winning side of WWII because the British were there!"

The British were on the war before the Americans and were losing. Without the Americans the Germans would have won.

Sounds like your partner doesn't know a thing about WWII. Or military strategy... Or plain GRATITUDE.

I'm sorry, but that WWII comment irks me. 3 dead American soldiers were left on Normandy, for every soldier that made it. It was what it took to take over a heavily fortified territory from the Germans. Europe had been on the war for years and had no soldiers to lose in that ratio, not even the brits did.

According to Sun Tzu, one of the best strategists in history, to conquer a territory occupied by an enemy you need either a force 4 times as big ( or as mighty) as the enemy or you have to go for guerrilla war. The Americans provided the 3X troops to die to free Europe, the Europeans gave the rest.

It may sound funny to joke about it 50 years later, now that all is well, but it is very ignorant IMHO. Those 3 that died for every live soldier had families and friends and absolutely no obligation to bail Europe out, you know ?

[Yamaneko]

The Russians did more to sway the fight towards Allied victory during World War II than the United States did. One of the greatest misconceptions propagated today on the American public is that the Normandy invasion was the turning point of the war, when in fact the defeat of Hitler's Sixth Army at Stalingrad in 1943 placed the first nail in the Nazi war machine. By the time U.S. and British forces stormed the beaches in 1944, the German armies were already weakened, and the Red Army was on its way to Germany. Don't get me wrong, the United States did its share of the fighting, but they certainly did not win the war single-handedly, and its doubtful they could have won it without the immense sacrifice of the Russian people.

[Bart's Friend Milhouse]

Fighting wars abroad is tougher than dealing with one at home. I believe some of the battlefields of Vietnam were jungles, rainforests, maybe different conditions to what the troops were trained for

[Wild0ne]

What wars did the Americans lose?? Well besides the ones they really didnt have to get involved in (Vietnam, and this one over in Iraq) but those were to try to prove something, but figured it wasnt worth risking so many lives for something they didnt have to fight.

If they were going to get into a real war where the country was being threatened to be taken over they wouldnt lose...

Unless it was China...can't trust those peps..

[Renmiri]

The Russians did more to sway the fight towards Allied victory during World War II than the United States did...Don't get me wrong, the United States did its share of the fighting, but they certainly did not win the war single-handedly, and its doubtful they could have won it without the immense sacrifice of the Russian people.

You are absolutely right, in regards to giving lives on the battlefield Russians did it even more than the Americans, and had it worse as a significant part of the war was fought in their own territory.

I just got irked at the jerk who thinks UK won the war single handedly, minimizing the tremendous sacrifice of Americans and Russians and of many others who pitched in.

[Madame Adequate]

The Russians did more to sway the fight towards Allied victory during World War II than the United States did. One of the greatest misconceptions propagated today on the American public is that the Normandy invasion was the turning point of the war, when in fact the defeat of Hitler's Sixth Army at Stalingrad in 1943 placed the first nail in the Nazi war machine. By the time U.S. and British forces stormed the beaches in 1944, the German armies were already weakened, and the Red Army was on its way to Germany. Don't get me wrong, the United States did its share of the fighting, but they certainly did not win the war single-handedly, and its doubtful they could have won it without the immense sacrifice of the Russian people.

From what I've learned about the war, I don't think the Allies could have won it if any of them were absent. Without American equipment prior to their actual military commitment, the British would have been kicked in. Without a Western front, Germany could have committed the vast majority of troops to fighting the Soviet Union, and let's be honest, they were good at what they did. I'm not sure I'd put my money on the Soviets if it was just them and the Third Reich going toe to toe. Similarly, had the Russians not been involved, the Nazi war machine could have been committed to fighting Western Europe, with likely very dire consequences again for Britain.

I really don't like this "We did the most to win WWII!" business that's going on in the world today. Most prominent, it's true, is the US with the movies and stuff, but over here in Britain we act exactly the same way, just less loudly. We really do seem to be of the opinion that it was Britain who won the Second World War, our tenacity and unwillingness to give in, and so forth. We all did a great deal to win WWII and I argue that if any of the major powers involved hadn't been involved, the others would have had a far, far more difficult time, if victory was possible at all.

[escobert]

But the British did less

[Timerk]

"We Have Met The Enemy, And He Is Us"
--Walt Kelly

[Renmiri]

I really don't like this "We did the most to win WWII!" business that's going on in the world today. Most prominent, it's true, is the US with the movies and stuff, but over here in Britain we act exactly the same way, just less loudly. We really do seem to be of the opinion that it was Britain who won the Second World War, our tenacity and unwillingness to give in, and so forth. We all did a great deal to win WWII and I argue that if any of the major powers involved hadn't been involved, the others would have had a far, far more difficult time, if victory was possible at all.

Hear, hear!

[LazarCotoron]

This is going to sound harsh. World War II is 60 years ago-it's over, move on. Especially us over here in America because we stormed over seas-we didn't have to live day to day with it, which is something I truly admire the British for. I have mixed feelings about what my people, the Italians did, though from what I've been able to piece together from sources of history (if I'm to trust the things I read and see) it was more a matter of survival in Italy than anything else. Still, not our proudest moment. I might be 4th generation American, but I am proud to have heritage in Italy, even if I'm so out of touch with it I'll be labled as an idiot tourist. Such is life.

As for losing every war we get involved in, that's a simpler matter. I have several friends in the US Marines, Navy, and Air Force-there is no doubt from any of them that we don't lose the battles out there. Since I don't have access to all the classified documents it would take for me to confirm or deny the empiracal evidence, I am left with really only two thoughts.

The first is that I'm being lied to by my friends who happen to be in the armed services. I find that somewhat unlikely. Impossible, no, but unlikely.

The second is that our media sells us out so completely it's disgusting. That I can prove, over and over again. I always wonder about it, honestly. How did American reporters manage exclusives with Terrorist Cells-ever? How is it that stations in our media are being forwarded 'classified' information, which they then blurt out on national airwaves?

From what I've seen, Americans don't lose fights-we're great at knocking people over. No-we lose as soon as diplomacy becomes involved. And since I honestly don't know what sorts of things that our officials say at those tables, I can honestly say that I don't know why. Then again, if our ambassadors are from certain parts of this country, I could probably piece together likely scenarios. After all, I know how politicians in the West Coast, the Southwest, New England, and to some extent, the Mississippi River Valley states work. Each one has a different sort of scum, honestly.

The 'United States' is sort've a sham right now. I believe it comes and goes in cycles, and presently, we're in a bad spot. Unfortunately, the problem goes down pretty deep. Me? I blame the lobbyists and think tanks... and I wonder more often than not about our arms business.

[Wuggly Blight]

Amercia entered WWII PURELY for self intrest, they was selling expensive outdated equipment from ww1, hardly generious and its inimaginably annoying the amercians keep saying WE SAVED YOUR ASS, WE SAVED THE WORLD SINGLE HANDED, I got it just yesterday from an American in my course, How many countries was in the war? It really needs to stop glorfying itself its really not healthy.

I found this article site years ago, Its very qoutable.
http://www.vexen.co.uk/USA/hateamerica.html#WW2

[Heero Yuy NWZC]

I don't think your friend knows that we only lost the Vietnam War. We were very good aid in the world wars and were never just minor support. We were why they won.

[Zeldy]

The British were on the war before the Americans and were losing. Without the Americans the Germans would have won.

She's right, we would be speaking German if the USA hadn't joined.

My god xD Thats a scary thought.

[Renmiri]

Listen, the lobbyists, arms industry and the powerful may have taken America to WWII just out of self interest. But the kids who died on that beach did it to help fellow human beings. They gave their lives to help you and you should honor their sacrifice as much as you honor your soldiers. PEOPLE die in wars, governments wage them. Don't confuse the two.

[Madame Adequate]

Amercia entered WWII PURELY for self intrest, they was selling expensive outdated equipment from ww1, hardly generious and its inimaginably annoying the amercians keep saying WE SAVED YOUR ASS, WE SAVED THE WORLD SINGLE HANDED, I got it just yesterday from an American in my course, How many countries was in the war? It really needs to stop glorfying itself its really not healthy.

I found this article site years ago, Its very qoutable.
http://www.vexen.co.uk/USA/hateamerica.html#WW2

What's commonly overlooked is that, at the time, America's self-interests were in everyone's interests, because their idea of bringing about security and peace was for everyone to have democracy and capitalism. (Edit: That actually does remain the philosophy today, conspiracy theories of some weird occult secret society trying to rule the world aside. They're just not very GOOD at it.)

Evil smurfers, those Americans, wanting peace and democracy.

Edit: Secondly, the reason America didn't want to enter World War II was because they didn't want to get involved in the rest of the world's business. It ended up getting involved because A) Churchill practically begged and B) America got attacked. So now today, America (At the behest of much of the world) DOES get involved, and they get the same kind of anti-American bull they used to get for being 'cowards' and whatever.