Who put the most in WW2?

[Greater Slavic Union]

Who put the most effort to survive the Second World War and possibly win it?

Choose one country/partisan-group and tell us why did you choose that certain nation/partisan group by a medium-high detailed post.

Unluckily, as you can see by the second post, I could not put 10+ options.

For those of you who could ask the measuring stick... it is your feeling. If you feel the UK put the most efforts, just say it and why.

Personally, I would say the USSR put it, but I am waiting to see what do you think about this question.

[Greater Slavic Union]

I did not put many things here (I wanted to put partisans country-by-country), but NS polls have a limit for the option you can put in.

When I say Minor belligerants, I mean both countries from the allies and the axis.

[Galloism]

What's our measuring stick?

[Socialist Nordia]

Add more to the OP, including your own opinion if you want this to stay unlocked. The mods lock threads when the OP is that short.

Anyway, id have to say the UK.

[Greater Slavic Union]

What's our measuring stick?

The one you feel put the most effort.

[Korica]

The soviet Union put the most effort.

[Galloism]

What's our measuring stick?

The one you feel put the most effort.

Effort as in materials, lives lost, production hours (that one could be really hard to come by), financial costs... what's our metric?

I mean, if we go by lives lost then the USSR wins hands down. They lost more soldiers than anyone else and ten times more than the US and UK combined. If we go by materials, the US is a top contender - since it was providing military equipment and aid to almost everyone on the allies side.

Financial costs I'd have to look up.

[Khadgar]

The one you feel put the most effort.

Effort as in materials, lives lost, production hours (that one could be really hard to come by), financial costs... what's our metric?

I mean, if we go by lives lost and the USSR wins hands down. They lost more soldiers than anyone else and ten times more than the US and UK combined. If we go by materials, the US is a top contender - since it was providing military equipment and aid to almost everyone on the allies side.

Financial costs I'd have to look up.

Seems like the worst run countries will be winners for "Put in most" simply due to inefficiency. Guess that means Germany would be near top of the pile.

[Greater Slavic Union]

The one you feel put the most effort.

Effort as in materials, lives lost, production hours (that one could be really hard to come by), financial costs... what's our metric?

I mean, if we go by lives lost and the USSR wins hands down. They lost more soldiers than anyone else and ten times more than the US and UK combined. If we go by materials, the US is a top contender - since it was providing military equipment and aid to almost everyone on the allies side.

Financial costs I'd have to look up.

I know. But I want people to say what they believe. Someone could believe Italy put the most to survive the War, and I would like to know what do the people think, and why.

[The Archregimancy]

Against the Nazis, overall, the Soviet Union.

Against the Japanese, overall, the United States.

In terms of overall logistical and industrial effort, these were the two indispensable nations in those respective theatres, though other countries also played important supporting roles.

But in the summer of 1940, the country that singlehandedly made sure the war wouldn't be lost - which isn't at all the same thing as subsequently doing the most to make sure it was won - was the United Kingdom (and associated dominions and territories).

[Greater Slavic Union]

Against the Nazis, overall, the Soviet Union.

Against the Japanese, overall, the United States.

In terms of overall logistical and industrial effort, these were the two indispensable nations in those respective theatres, though other countries also played important supporting roles.

But in the summer of 1940, the country that singlehandedly made sure the war wouldn't be lost - which isn't at all the same thing as subsequently doing the most to make sure it was won - was the United Kingdom (and associated dominions and territories).

Well, it was not the UK with its dominions only, as the best RAF squadrons were the Czechoslovak and Polish (mainly the 303rd RAF Squadron) squadrons. And the best UK ace was a Czechoslovak.

[Pope Joan]

Russia says that the US was late to the game in Europe, entering at a time when Russian success was assured. That may or may not be revisionism, but the Russian losses of life are stark reality.

" For every American soldier killed fighting Germans, eighty Soviet soldiers died fighting them....

"About the only way we can begin to understand is through imagination. The distance between Moscow and Berlin is about the same as that separating New York City and Atlanta. Imagine twenty million people being violently killed between those two American cities in four years. The Eastern Front in the war wound like a serpent from Sevastopol on the Black Sea to Leningrad on the Baltic. Including the twists, bulges and turns of the line of battle at the height of German penetration, November 1942, the line would have stretched from Baltimore to Cheyenne, Wyoming. In place of Leningrad, can you fathom Chicago under bitter siege and constant shelling for 900 days? Is it possible for us to mentally picture thousands of dead bodies lying on the frozen streets between Lake Shore Drive and Evanston? Could we endure seeing a million people die, mostly from starvation, during the Chicago siege or begin to fathom our own citizens engaging in cannibalism for profit? At the same time of the Chicago siege think of Cincinnati becoming a battleground such as Stalingrad where not a single structure was left habitable and several hundred thousand soldiers killed each other in the process of leveling the city. Mentally switch names such as Smolensk, Karkov, Minsk, Kiev and Rostov for American cities and picture them destroyed and silenced. If such images are possible for us to even conceive, we can begin to understand why Americans refer to the conflict as World War Two, but the Russians universally refer to it as the Great Patriotic War.




The Numbersi
The populations of the United States and the USSR were about the same, 130,000,000, when both nations went to war within six months of each other in 1941. To Americans, we were sending our boys to fight a foreign war that we'd never experience. To the Soviets, it was an up front and personal war of monumental savagery. America would lose slightly more than 400,000 soldiers (killed or missing) and almost no civilians during World War II and the USSR would lose at least 11,000,000 soldiers (killed and missing) as well as somewhere between 7,000,000 and 20,000,000 million of its civilian population during the Great Patriotic War."

http://www.eisenhowerinstitute.org/abou ... rience.dot

[The first Galactic Republic]

Wouldn't that be Germany? Responsible for the war in Europe and all.

[Nulukkizdin]

Yeah gotta go with the Soviets, i mean they got their ass handed to them once they got dragged in but still managed to kick both Nazi and Japanese ass in the end. They really put in everything they had as for them it was either winning the war or the end of the Soviet Union as a whole.

[Arlenton]

Germany, probably.

[Rufford]

I'd put the Soviets first, but only ahead of the mighty UK by a small bit. Both countries insured the war wouldn't be lost, and both took an absolute battering at home, which the US didn't have to deal with.

[Nulukkizdin]

I'd put the Soviets first, but only ahead of the mighty UK by a small bit. Both countries insured the war wouldn't be lost, and both took an absolute battering at home, which the US didn't have to deal with.

I agree, UK would be a very close second. For them as well it was either winning or ceasing to exist.

[Greater Slavic Union]

I will post tomorrow my opinion. Or I will do it today. I do not know (notice here it is 22:38). You will be surprised.

[Rufford]

I'd put the Soviets first, but only ahead of the mighty UK by a small bit. Both countries insured the war wouldn't be lost, and both took an absolute battering at home, which the US didn't have to deal with.

I agree, UK would be a very close second. For them as well it was either winning or ceasing to exist.

The CTE bit is a good point, America was impossible to conquer without nuclear weapons, and still is, though arguably a bit less now.

[Greater Slavic Union]

I agree, UK would be a very close second. For them as well it was either winning or ceasing to exist.

The CTE bit is a good point, America was impossible to conquer without nuclear weapons, and still is, though arguably a bit less now.

Sorry for this stupid post: nice flag.

[Rufford]

The CTE bit is a good point, America was impossible to conquer without nuclear weapons, and still is, though arguably a bit less now.

Sorry for this stupid post: nice flag.

Cheers.

[Dacia and Occupied Ostmark]

Czecheslovakia, Poland and Romania gave quite a bit in WWII, Czecheslovakia had pilots fighting for it in the RAF, As did Poland but there were also Free Polish Forces both in the west and the east, also the Germans stole the design of the Mareșal tank destroyer, calling theirs a Hetzer.

Mareșal:



Hetzer:

[The Empire of Pretantia]

Germany put the most effort in. :^)

Seriously though. Sacrificing the entire economy to uphold the military, conscripting every boy in the country, devoting their technological minds to developing new weapons, and being willing to initiate the bloodiest war in history.

They still lost and they did kinda sorta ka way just a little abhorrent things, but they get an A for effort.

Meanwhile in America: lolindustry

[Reploid Productions]

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=88796#p18946099