- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
French poll: What nation contributed most to the defeat of Nazi Germany in 1945?
Posted on 9/23/15 at 8:08 pm
Posted on 9/23/15 at 8:08 pm
quote:
A survey conducted by Ifop in May 1945, on the whole French territory now freed (and confirming a September 1944 survey with Parisians), showed that the interviewees appear well aware of the power relations and the role of allies in the war, despite censorship and the difficulty under occupation access to reliable information.
Thus, a clear majority (57%) believe that the USSR is the nation that has contributed most to the defeat of Germany while the United States and England, yet liberating the national territory, will respectively collect 20% and 12%.
But what is truly astonishing is that this vision of public opinion was reversed very dramatically over time, as shown by two surveys conducted in 1994, 2004 and in May 2015:
What nation contributed most to the defeat of Nazi Germany in 1945?
May 1945
Soviet Union- 57%
USA- 20%
Great Britain: 12%
1994
USA- 49%
Soviet Union- 25%
Great Britain- 16%
2004
Soviet Union- 20%
USA- 58%
Great Britain- 16%
2014
USA- 54%
Soviet Union- 23%
Great Britain- 18%
Poll results in Europe (2015)
France
USA- 61%
Great Britain- 9%
Soviet Union- 8%
Germany
USA- 52%
Soviet Union- 17%
Great Britain- 4%
Great Britain
Great Britain- 46%
USA- 16%
Soviet Union- 13%
LINK
13
Posted on 9/23/15 at 8:12 pm to Bench McElroy
History channel is pro-american. Persuades public opinion
Posted on 9/23/15 at 8:12 pm to Bench McElroy
US military has gotten better over time 
Posted on 9/23/15 at 8:13 pm to Bench McElroy
The British are so cute. 
Posted on 9/23/15 at 8:16 pm to Bench McElroy
It really probably was the Soviet Union, although these things are difficult to quantify. They lost by far more troops and the Germans overextended themselves on the eastern front. I don't know how much you count the supplies that we were giving everybody though, and I simply don't know the extent to which we helped the Soviets in this regard.
We definitely did a lot more to defeat the Japs though.
We definitely did a lot more to defeat the Japs though.
Posted on 9/23/15 at 8:17 pm to Bench McElroy
Lol its the USA. We bankrolled the Soviets too so the don't count.
Back-2-Back World War Champs
Back-2-Back World War Champs
Posted on 9/23/15 at 8:19 pm to PsychTiger
quote:
The British are so cute.
I didn't read all the way to the bottom.
Of course the Brits thought they did most of it. They holed up on their island until reinforcements came for help on the western front.Posted on 9/23/15 at 8:21 pm to Peazey
The French love Americans!
Posted on 9/23/15 at 8:22 pm to Bench McElroy
It's a wonder how stories changed long ago before the printing press was invented.
Posted on 9/23/15 at 8:34 pm to Bench McElroy
Time in this essence is correct in attributing the U.S. with credit.. We provided billions to the Russians through the lend lease program...:It's likely this helped tilt the eastern front in their favor.. We provided thousands of tanks, armored vehicles, medical supplies, food, and munitions through the arctic.
This post was edited on 9/23/15 at 8:40 pm
Posted on 9/23/15 at 8:38 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
Print the shirts
Posted on 9/23/15 at 8:44 pm to AUCE05
Posted on 9/23/15 at 8:46 pm to Bench McElroy
quote:
Great Britain- 46%
USA- 16%
Soviet Union- 13%
I thought the Brits shot their load at Dunkirk. While we'd supplied them. Then we came in.
This post was edited on 9/23/15 at 8:48 pm
Posted on 9/23/15 at 8:47 pm to Bench McElroy
USSR and USA have almost an equal responsibility in it but I think the USSR probably had a little more to do with it since they helped exhaust their fuel supply. Hitler could have probably held off the US and UK by themselves had the USSR not gotten involved. We were much more tactical in our battle plans. The Soviets just threw numbers at the Nazis.
This post was edited on 9/23/15 at 8:49 pm
Posted on 9/23/15 at 8:48 pm to Bench McElroy
When you look at it, really three battles changed the outcome of the war on the European theate. Stalingrad, the RAF beating back the Luftwaffe in the London raids, and D-Day. I'd say it was all about equal. Although, like others have said, we bank rolled the entire war. Hell, the Soviets couldn't even give every soldier a weapon in Stalingrad. The Allied powers were extremely lucky that the Soviets won that battle.
Posted on 9/23/15 at 8:51 pm to Henry Jones Jr
If I recall correctly, Hitler committed 80% of the German war machine to the Soviet Front...
Hitler hated the Bolsheviks..
Hitler hated the Bolsheviks..
Posted on 9/23/15 at 8:53 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
The United States probably actively did more the the Soviet Union but the Soviet invasion is what really sunk the Nazis. It just depends on how much credit you give the Soviets for living in a cold harsh land.
Posted on 9/23/15 at 8:54 pm to Bench McElroy
Soviet propaganda was pretty powerful back then, and the French had a strong socialist/communist leaning during/immediately after the war. However, the passage of time and the Cold War between NATO and the Warsaw Pact chipped away at Soviet popularity almost immediately - I mean, the Soviet blockade of Berlin and their ultimate building of an almost literal iron (wire, concrete, mines) curtain shattered many of the naive westerners' ideas of the Socialist Utopia.
But, really, the Nazis wouldn't have been beaten without any of the 3 major Allied powers, certainly not dislodged from much of their European holdings. By themselves, the Soviets might have been able to hold much of Russia proper and may even have gotten back some of the Ukraine. And the U.K. and Soviet Union likely wouldn't have made it to 1942 or 1943 without U.S. logistical assistance, Lend/lease, etc.
And we wouldn't have had bases from which to operate or the Red Army anvil to hammer the Germans into submission in early 1945.
Soviet contributed the most manpower (and losses of that manpower), we contributed the most material equipment, and the U.K. contributed the most intelligence resources and things like that.
But, really, the Nazis wouldn't have been beaten without any of the 3 major Allied powers, certainly not dislodged from much of their European holdings. By themselves, the Soviets might have been able to hold much of Russia proper and may even have gotten back some of the Ukraine. And the U.K. and Soviet Union likely wouldn't have made it to 1942 or 1943 without U.S. logistical assistance, Lend/lease, etc.
And we wouldn't have had bases from which to operate or the Red Army anvil to hammer the Germans into submission in early 1945.
Soviet contributed the most manpower (and losses of that manpower), we contributed the most material equipment, and the U.K. contributed the most intelligence resources and things like that.
Posted on 9/23/15 at 8:54 pm to klrstix
I was about to say...they were probably the most pissed off, and being closer in proximity was probably motivating
Posted on 9/23/15 at 8:55 pm to Bench McElroy
Sadly, it was almost unquestionably the Russians who contributed the most. Sure, we saved them from total defeat via large materiel aid but they got it done with massive manpower and sacrifice.
That doesn't mean the US effort wasn't a big part of it too though. And of course Russia was basically absent in the Pacific Theater.
That doesn't mean the US effort wasn't a big part of it too though. And of course Russia was basically absent in the Pacific Theater.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News