WW II could we have won without the Muslims?

[1959]

Some Brits have a serious problem accepting that the US played a huge part in our success in WW2.

There is a strong argument that neither Britain or the US would have got anywhere if it wasn't for our allies at the time, the now-defunct Soviet Union.

Over the course of the entire war, Britain and the US lost about 400,000 lives each (and that figure includes a relatively small amount of civilian deaths) while the Soviets lost over 20 million lives. More than half of those were civilian deaths caused by slaughter, famine and so on, but they still lost about 10 million soldiers. Yes, that's 10 million.

Like our own losses that we've been remembering this week, each one was a tragedy for those left behind, but the statistics for Soviet losses are staggering and dwarf anything that happened to what we now call the western allies. For instance, on D-Day itself, the UK, US and Canada suffered a total of 2,500 deaths. In the Battle for Berlin in the latter half of April 1945, almost 100,000 Soviet soldiers were killed.

Yes, the US played a fairly important part in the outcome of the war, but the Soviet Union's role was absolutely critical.

 

[Chicken Runner61]

Read The Most Dangerous Enemy by Steven Bungay if you want to know why the Allies won the Second World War but to sum it up:

1. We survived the Battle of Britain
2. The Russian Red Army destroyed the Wehrmacht
3. The USA had the most powerful economy which overwhelmed what was left of Germany

or

We gave our time, The Russians gave their lives, The Yanks gave (but mostly made) their money

Muslims on either side were insignificant

If Malta had fallen there might not have been a battle of britain. Even Rommel said "Without Malta the Axis will end by losing control of North Africa". More bombs fell on an island the size of the IOW than on the whole of the UK - it was the most bombed place on earth.

 

[beorhthelm]

Some Brits have a serious problem accepting that the US played a huge part in our success in WW2.

i dont think anyone questions the involvement of the US in WWII. now WWI is slightly debatable.

 

[SULLY COULDNT SHOOT]

Hmm... why did we win the war?

Adolf Hitler

He made two of the most stupid and catastrophic tactical decisions in military history.

(1) He attacked a country that was (at the time) unconquerable... a country that at the time was his ally and had a massive inferiority complex to Germany. If he had finished off Europe first he could have taken his time over Russia with almost as many resources and land as the Russians had.
(2) He didnt try and knock Britain out of the war from the outset. Admittedly he was horribly advised by Goering over the Battle of Britain but the honest truth is if the German army had kept marching after Paris we would have been in much deeper trouble.

Anyone who watched the fantastic series on TV last year will know that France was won by the generals.... and then Hitler took over and proceeded to ignore them.

Hitler was Britains secret weapon.

By the way, dandyman, no mention of the Poles who fought for the nazis... I dont think it was only the Germanic Poles living in Wroclaw, Poznan etc.

 

[Prettyboyshaw]

If you had said without the Russians or Americans maybe

 

[Cadiz Seagull]

Going back to the question posed by the original poster, yes the Allies would definitely have won without the Muslims. The Indian army, along with other commonwealth armies, certainly played an important part but they were predominantly Hindus and Sikhs.

If you really want to know which group arguably had the biggest influence on the war, maybe they didn't win it but for sure they shortened it by at least a year and maybe more, then look no further than Bletchley Park.

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

Muslim SS division Handzar didn't fair too well though

 

[SULLY COULDNT SHOOT]

As a Muslim I find this question strange.

When did faith come into WW2? The key question is could Britain have won the war without the Indian army? That is debatable as the Indian army was pretty important in stopping the Japanese drive across Asia. But was it it just the men or the command, which was largely English and how effective was the army really?

I think the answer is that all the men and women who died on the Allied side, regardless of creed or colour, were instrumental in the defeat of the axis and should be remembered for it.

 

[SULLY COULDNT SHOOT]

Going back to the question posed by the original poster, yes the Allies would definitely have won without the Muslims. The Indian army, along with other commonwealth armies, certainly played an important part but they were predominantly Hindus and Sikhs.

If you really want to know which group arguably had the biggest influence on the war, maybe they didn't win it but for sure they shortened it by at least a year and maybe more, then look no further than Bletchley Park.

The work at Bletchley shortened the war by about two years and was pretty much the reason why the Russians destroyed the Wehrmacht at Kursk.

Would like to see the exact breakdown of the faith numbers in the Indian army though as I seem to remember it was the numbers of Muslims in the Indian army that was used as an argument for Muslims getting their own country separate from India.

 

[looney]

WW2, all played a part but the Russians made the greatest sacrifices. One of the best war films ive seen in recent years was Enemy at the Gates about the Battle for Stalingrad.

 

[ILIKECANDLES]

yes.

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

Hmm... why did we win the war?

Adolf Hitler

He made two of the most stupid and catastrophic tactical decisions in military history.

(1) He attacked a country that was (at the time) unconquerable... a country that at the time was his ally and had a massive inferiority complex to Germany. If he had finished off Europe first he could have taken his time over Russia with almost as many resources and land as the Russians had.
(2) He didnt try and knock Britain out of the war from the outset. Admittedly he was horribly advised by Goering over the Battle of Britain but the honest truth is if the German army had kept marching after Paris we would have been in much deeper trouble.

Anyone who watched the fantastic series on TV last year will know that France was won by the generals.... and then Hitler took over and proceeded to ignore them.

Hitler was Britains secret weapon.

By the way, dandyman, no mention of the Poles who fought for the nazis... I dont think it was only the Germanic Poles living in Wroclaw, Poznan etc.

just goes to show how many people were against the communists/Jews across Europe and were prepared to get their hands dirty .the legacy still lives on in certain countries.

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

WW2, all played a part but the Russians made the greatest sacrifices. One of the best war films ive seen in recent years was Enemy at the Gates about the Battle for Stalingrad.

that's because they normally just threw themselves forward urged on by their comisars wave after wave

 

[jakarta]

the americans primary interest was destorying japan,europe was really a side show

nagasaki and hiroshima bore the brunt of american power

as would of the germans,if the russians and british had failed

Sorry your first point is complete nonsense I'm afraid, see extract from Wikipedia below......


Soon after the declaration of war, the United States and the United Kingdom agreed at the Arcadia Conference on the "Europe first" strategy, and the United States committed to sending its army and air force to fight Germany in Europe and Africa as soon as those forces were ready. The campaign against Japan would be focused on halting Japanese expansion until the war on Germany was complete, at which time the full power of the United Kingdom, the United States, and eventually the Soviet Union could be turned against Japan. This strategy would concentrate on what was perceived as the strongest of the Axis Powers, and would prevent a German victory that might knock the United Kingdom or the Soviets out of the war.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were very much the fag end of Americas airborne bombardment, they killed many, many more people with conventional Firebombing of Japans Cities, still it was a useful demonstration to the Soviet Union of their new Technology.

 

[jakarta]

If Malta had fallen there might not have been a battle of britain. Even Rommel said "Without Malta the Axis will end by losing control of North Africa". More bombs fell on an island the size of the IOW than on the whole of the UK - it was the most bombed place on earth.

Er no, the Battle of Britain took place in the Summer of 1940, the siege and bombing of Malta in 1942, although there a common link in that both times the Luftwaffe were defeated by Keith Park, surely the most unsung military genius of World War II

 

[Chicken Runner61]

Er no, the Battle of Britain took place in the Summer of 1940, the siege and bombing of Malta in 1942, although there a common link in that both times the Luftwaffe were defeated by Keith Park, surely the most unsung military genius of World War II

Er No the battles to take malta started BEFORE the Summer of 1940 with Mussolini and continued with the Germans throughout 1941. Hitler was so incensed with the faliure to take Malta he sent dozens more planes to blow it out of the Med.

In fact since 1938 Mussolini and Hitler wanted malta as the stepping stone to North africa. If Malta had fallen before the BOB Hitler might not have tried to bomb Britain as he would have over run N africa and that is why Rommel thought it cost Germany the war.

 

[tonymgc]

Interesting film for anyone interested about the role Muslims played in World War 2 is Days Of Glory. Its a French made film about Moroccans fighting alongside the allies through Africa, Italy & the liberation of France.

 

[daveinprague]

I dont normally watch films with subtitles but 'Days of glory'
was worth the effort

 

[KneeOn]

A Brighton landmark few on here will have heard of.

The Chattri Memorial

My mum is half indian and at 10 took me and my sister up there to see the Chattri.

 

[looney]

Interesting film for anyone interested about the role Muslims played in World War 2 is Days Of Glory. Its a French made film about Moroccans fighting alongside the allies through Africa, Italy & the liberation of France.

Did it mention that the Goumiers raped their way across Italy?

How much of the film was focused on the battles of Monte Cassino?

Genuine curiosity.