Praxius Praxius:
I'm not attempting to downplay the US's contribution, I'm merely bringing the hype down to reality.
Considering your tone about the US contribution to World War II, you sound like you are trying to downplay the United States' contribution to World War II...
$1:
Yes, the US had their own little war with Japan during WWII.... China, Australia and other nations nearby who were attacked by Japan were also involved. The US played a much larger role in the Pacific, but the claims about their contributions in Europe were greatly exaggerated, especially in today's pop culture.
Like here, for example. America's "own little war"? It was a major theater of World War II. Australia, New Zealand, and other Commonwealth territories and nations did not have the resources or manpower to defend itself, and most of the British fleet was engaged with the Germans when the Japanese attacked. The Chinese might have had manpower, but most of their industrial areas fell to the Japanese before Pearl Harbor even began, and the Chinese forces did not have the equipment to push back the more advanced Japanese out of China.
$1:
There have been many hollywood movies that potray the US doing many things they weren't even involved in..... take U-571.... it was actually the British who obtained the Enigma coder from U-110 and before the US entered the war, and the actual U-571 sub wasn't involved in any such situation. It was actually sunk in 1944 off of Ireland by the Australian Air Force (No. 461 Squad)
So you're downplaying and being condescending of American contributions to the war effort because of Hollywood? Are you serious? They're entertainment, nothing more. There are very, very few movies based on history that can have any resemblance to true fact.
$1:
Yet some would try and make it sound like it was a true story and it was the US who did all of these important things during the war..... and the real problem is that there are less informed people out there who believe these things to be fact and further the ignorance.
Like who? If you want to inform those individuals, then fine, but if you're going to act like the Americans played a small part, or, much more entertainingly, talk of America's contribution to World War II as
"... and suddenly when the Germans' advance was stopped and began to be pushed back, suddenly the US decides to tag along & fight along with us...."
then you have no right to attempt to educate those who are less informed unless you can hold your own biases and contempt in check.
$1:
The Russians were the most instrumental military force during WWII, not just due to their man power, but their superior-designed tanks such as the T-34 which used slope armour - quick to manufacture and cheap to manufacture - as well as their un-yeilding offense that didn't stop until they reached Berlin itself.
In Eastern Europe, sure they were. In the Pacific, not so much. Yes, the Russians developed an effective battle tank to face off against the Germans, what choice did they have? And to say German tank forces didn't have some powerful tanks of their own. Like I said earlier, the Eastern Front was a massive grinder of man and machine. The Soviets had more to throw in.
$1:
Meanwhile the Pacific was what made the US a superpower....
but in regards to the US trading with everybody, Axis & Ally alike, that's not something I'd give them brownie points for.
Once again, so? The Americans were isolationist in regards to European foreign policy. They saw the nightmare of the alliance system in World War I and wanted no part of it. All nations, be it the United States, Canada, the USSR, the United Kingdom, etc etc have stains on their reputation.
$1:
Yes, most western nations, including Canada refused to let Jewish people into the Country, but since the US and many other nations did the same thing.... that part cancels out in regards to this topic.
Absolutely not. If you can rail against the United States over their trading with both sides, I can certainly point out that we let in 4,000 of the 800,000 Jewish refugees escaping Europe. Even if other countries did the same thing, the fact that we let in such a small amount compared to countries like Argentina is a blemish that will tarnish Canada for a long time.
$1:
But when we have our nations fighting an enemy as powerful and determined as the Germans were, and we have one of our allies, the US, openly traded with the enemy we were all fighting against, thus most likely prolonging the war, that concerns me and cancels out much of their so-called contributions.
Because, at the time, the United States wasn't at war with Nazi Germany. They traded with allied forces too. Seemingly, they don't balance each other out, now do they? Of course not, because, in your view, that tarnishes the Americans more than anything else. If you are going to make accusations against the United States, while ignoring the political reality of the time (America was neutral, and a number of the trade deals were formed before the rise of Nazi Germany, as well as before the actual war began) and the fact that the Americans sold military equipment to the Commonwealth during the conflict, then you're being as ignorant as those who take their history lessons from Hollywood.
Think about it, for a second. The Americans weren't going to risk their shipping during the conflict, and the Germans had no chance in hell to send their merchant shipping to the United States during the actual war. Most of the "trading" with Nazi Germany occurred before Nazi Germany was an enemy of the Commonwealth. You can't condemn the Americans for not predicting the future.