Europeans think US army liberated continent during WW2
 

As little as 13 percent of Europeans think the Soviet Army played the leading role in liberating Europe from Nazism during WW2, a recent poll targeting over 3,000 people in France, Germany and the UK reveals.

The majority of respondents ? 43 percent ? said the US Army played the main role in liberating Europe. The survey, carried out from March 20 to April 9, 2015, was conducted by the British ICM Research agency for Sputnik News.

Over 50 percent of Germans and over 61 percent of French citizens believe their ancestors were liberated by the Americans. Nearly fifty percent of Britons think British forces actually played the key role in ending the Second World War. Only 8 percent of respondents in France and 13 percent in Germany credited the Soviet Army for the victory.

WW2 lasted from 1939 to 1945 and involved over 80 countries and regions. Up to 70 million people are believed to have lost their lives. However, the USSR suffered the biggest losses. At least 27 million Soviet citizens died during the war.

Continued Perverted history: Europeans think US army liberated continent during WW2 â?? RT News

maybe they mean with 'liberated' also that the people didn't have to live under a communist regime. Eastern Germany is only free since the wall game down.


The city i come from was liberated by the Canadians.

Ask a Pole, a Romanian, a Hungarian, a Czech, a Slovak, a Bulgarian, or a Berliner how the Red army set them free.

i am waiting for the Cherry dude to explain how that was a good thing

Why would this surprise anyone? The majority of the people in the UK and France - and Italy for that matter - Saw the US Army roll through.... Not the Soviets who quickly became the enemy directly after WWII. In the US it's very much the same.

the survey need to be sorted by geography. there were plenty of countries liberated by the USA. and if you were from one of those countries then the right answer for you would be the Americans liberated me and my country. in fact, most of the European countries were liberated by the Allies, not Ruskies.

Who were the 3000 targeted targets? Africans on an integration course? The population of an alzhheimer-centre? RT-visitors? And by who were they targeted? RT? CNN? Journalists? Scientists? So.... this "Europeans think US army liberated continent during WW2" can not be quoted for truth...

I can't speak for the other countries... but i learned in primary school (Netherlands) that Hitler was defeated by an Alliance of many countries...

The majority of people that saw this happen, are not the majority of living people anymore. So it's impossible that the majority of people surveyed saw this happen.

Unless the majority of people surveyed were over 70 years old.

They didn't need to see it. Their parents and their grand parents told them, and it's been accepted as fact. And they still see this today. Russia doesn't have air bases in the UK or Italy - but the US does.

it's accepted because it was and is fact rochard. the damn op article is from a Ruskie propaganda media website.

Thanks !:thumbsup

Fuck, make up your mind.

You see, history taught by the current leaders, is not necessarily history made by real events. What would the the use of crediting the victory to the real winner, when the winner has died already? The leaders are better getting the credit for that. Maybe, that way, they can calm down the revolutionary desires, among fool youth.

Harry S. Truman was not (yet) the President in 1941.

Good catch!

And the Ruskies were not part of the Allies ?

oh no.

dyna mo and his history knowledge, once again :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh :1orglaugh

:2 cents::2 cents::2 cents::2 cents:

:1orglaugh

The Soviets liberated nobody but themselves, Stalin ain't far from Hitler when it comes to evil. Read how the Red Army liberated the prisoners of Auschwitz.

The Soviets kicked the Nazis asses, the Allies/Americans liberated Europe. 27 million dead Russians to achieve that victory. By the time the Americans landed at Normandy the Nazis were already well on the way to being defeated, but without the Americans the war would have been extended while the death toll just kept rising. And had Stalin defeated the Nazis without the US presence in Europe, Stalin would have complete control over Western and Eastern Europe - with the US fast closing in on the atomic bomb God knows what would have happened. Maybe they would have brought Russia to its knees and chased them out of Europe completely.

I don't credit the victory over Nazi-Germany to any single country, but Soviet Union was the biggest player in the war against Germany. Germany's most losses came in eastern front.

No-one liberated Finland as we weren't conquered, hooray for that! But we did get help from Germany.

Communism stuff is another matter, as half of the Europe got under communism, but it is also worthwhile to mention that Europe was divided between allies, aka USA, UK, France, etc. made a deal with USSR to split Europe.

Ruskies were part of the Allies. There were Axis and Allies and some from that between. Soviet Union was in the Allies.

Iron curtain seems to be quite fifty fifty country and landmass wise. At least if you exclude Britain, Spain, Portugal and Iceland, as those were not under Nazis at any point.

http://www.english-online.at/history...on-curtain.gif

Thats all nice, but the fiddy percent who was on the west side was free to do anything they wanted, and the fiddy on the east was under dictatorship and other fine things following afterwards :error

The subject to "freed from" is Nazi Germany, not Soviet Union.

Hollywood did a good job as usually. Actually 99% of what people know about the USA, they know from the US movies and that's a totally fake information which has nothing in common with the reality.

Every WWII movie shows the Omaha beach invasion like the greatest battle ever which fully destroyed Nazis. This is a standard picture from the US movies. In fact only 3,000 allied and 1,200 Germans were killed in that "epic battle". Great success, yeah :upsidedow

Now compare it for example with Kursk Battle: 1,129,619 Soviets and 1,500,000 Germans killed (don't even mention tanks, aircrafts, artillery etc).

woot!

8asswhoopins'

Oops, I meant Stalingrad Battle. Kursk one was not that huge, but still was really epic.

Americans didn't roll through the streets of the UK because UK was never occupied by Germans. In France US rolled through the Streets together with many other nationalities... like canadians, poland, british, etc...

Not a fact... Hitler was defeated by Allies... US was part of it... among many other countries...

Sad but correct.... If there is one major reason why people could think the things in that article... holywood is the main reason... rince and repeat...

There is not ONE single country in Europe that was single handedly liberated by US. It were Allied forces... Yes... including the Russians. The reason you don't hear much about it is because after the war the Russians needed to be criminilazed (not without reason tho) in the heads of the European people... They went from liberators to the new big enemy.

World politics is a dirty game... they can all go fuckthemselfs... no one deserves my vote... fucking cockroaches...

the USA lost just as much people in ww2 as 3rd world shit hole yugoslavia did...so obviously the russians played no role at all in defeating hitler and the USA liberated, literally, the entire galaxy :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

in fact, the world did not spin before the USA!

the USA literally invented fire! :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Battle of Kursk was largest tank battle in history and it did destroy Germany's "newly formed" tank units (newly organized and reinforced). It's significance can be compared to Stalingrad. It just isn't as prominent in Soviet/ Russian propaganda.

"Guderian wrote:

With the failure of Zitadelle we have suffered a decisive defeat. The armoured formations, reformed and re-equipped with so much effort, had lost heavily in both men and equipment and would now be unemployable for a long time to come. It was problematical whether they could be rehabilitated in time to defend the Eastern Front ... Needless to say the [Soviets] exploited their victory to the full. There were to be no more periods of quiet on the Eastern Front. From now on, the enemy was in undisputed possession of the initiative."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Kursk#Results


Well.. Germany didn't recover from the losses. Its tank battalions became rather "thin" and even thinner as war progressed.

Who did tell you this nonsense? The Kursk Battle is one of the most famous events of WWII. E.g. this epic movie about epic battle (watch it at 1:05 - no computer graphics, all battle units are real):



I really don't understand why you say "The Battle of Kurks" is not prominent here, and I really wonder to know who told you that. Will be waiting for your reply, because I'm, really curious.

[QUOTE=CyberSEO;20541192]Fine, it is prominent in Russian propaganda. I am not going to argue about your propaganda, you probably know it better.

Sure I do. As well as I know German, UK and US propaganda (I have CNN, Fox, NBC, BBC, Deutsche Welle and EuroNews in my standard TV packet). I have no single Finnish news channel, sorry :)

Here, if you can't understand anything else, there is nice "sum it up" at the very end of this video. :)

Do you mean so-called Finnish war? It was a great fuckup because Staling has killed all Russian military leaders (he was afraid they take power on him), so there was no army officers that were able to command. So the result of that war is a well known. The same was at the beginning of the German - Soviet war in 1941. Fortunately the situation have changed on 1943 when new command groups were completely formed.

It is Winter war for us, and the following war is Continuation war. That video is about Winter war.

I don't feel sorry about your fuckups. Luckily there was fuckup as Finnish army wasn't in very good shape material wise (the "joke" goes that army could offer only cockade, belt and shoe brush). Well, many men had gun for their own behalf and the rest did get guns despite of the joke.

During Continuation war Soviets did get better armed, etc., but so did get Finnish and the result was pretty much the same as in Winter war. Stalin didn't conquer Finland in neither attempts.

Every war is winter for us :pimp As about that particular war, say thank you to Georgian rat Stalin. He did everything he could to destroy the Russian army.

hey dumbfuck, i don't waste my time typing out history so dumfucks like you can't find a fucking loophole


specifically, Allies WITHOUT ANY FUCKING HELP FROM RUSKIES LIBERATED MANY COUNTRIES IN EUROPE.

and my fucking point remains, if you were in a fucking country that got liberated by Americans, then your fucking answer would be Americans liberated my country.


how fucking stupid you have to be to try to gotcha me on this is beyond imagination. you are one stupid clusterfuck of human waste.

you'll be putting me on ignore very soon you dumbfuck hahahahahaha.

This.

The eastern block was all "liberated" by red Ruskies :Oh crap

there were several countries where the Americans were the dominating troops and again, i don't waste my knowledge here trying to educate gfyers, but my point remains, if the Americans were the huge majority of who you saw roll through your country liberating it, then of course your answer would be that the Americans liberated me and my country.

and again, the Allies liberated countries without Ruskies, like umm, FRANCE. i think many people here fail to know that the Allies (WITHOUT RUSKIES), wantted to and tried to, get to Berlin, umm, well, BEFORE THE FUCKING RUSKIES.

jtfc.

you stupid fucking cocksucker. even your own ruskie fucking propaganda machine states it thusly:


Perverted history: Europeans think US army liberated continent during WW2 â?? RT News

fuckwad ruskie cocksucker.

Not really, excluding some individual commanders, but the outranking commanders and leaders did sort this out otherwise.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yalta_...nce#Key_points

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tehran_Conference

fyi, no, those conferences have nothing to do with the fact eisenhower wanted to reach Berlin before the ruskies and planned to, as well Patton claiming he could easily sweep.

Eisenhower stopped troops at elbe when he realized that beating the ruskies to berlin was not achievable after losses in the ardennes and ruskie advancing quickly, and that's when Eisenhower died. he didn't stop on account of either of those agreements.

it's like some of you do not even realize Germany was being overrun from 2 different fronts, the ruskies on one front, the Western Allies on the other.

and a conference or 2 would not stop the impending clash between ruskies and anglo-Americans.

The brainwashed US clown doesn't understand a simple thing. It was impossible to take over Nazis by killing of 1200 German soldiers. He is a classic Hollywood product with a squash in his head. Don't waste your time on clueless idiots like him.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

it's recorded history you drunk fucking nitwit. but i'm not expecting you to grasp that shit.

fucking historical fact:

Eisenhower CHOSE to stop at Elbe
Eisenhower gave us three reasons for standing on the Elbe:
His armies were already well beyond the line of the western occupation zones that had been agreed to with the Soviets. Why take casualties for land that would have to be handed over? He had always worried about his troops meeting Soviets on the run around a corner. He thought it safer to meet them with a broad river between. And, finally, ''Berlin is only a political objective, not a military objective.''

The decision to stand on the Elbe was Ike's, the most controversial decision of his public career. At the time, Britain's Winston Churchill was furious. He wanted every effort made to reach Berlin before the Soviets. And he protested to Roosevelt that Ike had informed Stalin of this decision without consulting Churchill or Roosevelt.


Halt at the Elbe

Why Eisenhower Halted at the Elbe - CSMonitor.com

not that i expect a ruskie dumbfuck to embrace reality. so much for those conference agreements eh, Eisenhower already had troops past the demarcation agreed to.

Well, maybe wanted at some point and even tried to, but the divide of Germany, etc. was already quite settled.

The whole second front (aka western front) was demanded by Stalin and agreed in conference. So, it is no use to try to make US look like some Russian kicking bad ass cowboys. It really wasn't like that.

i understand that Germany was already divvied up, that has nothing to do at all with anything i had stated.

i never fucking once claimed "US look like some Russian kicking bad ass cowboys", as you try and spin my post.

my OP simply explained why some people view their liberation as they fucking do. it's the gfy dumbfuck brigade that can't figure that statement out and tried to gotcha me on it.

What is your problem? First of all I am not Russian (well, maybe you ment Cyberseo), nor this is about some Ike's "chose to" stuff. You seem to very much worried about US troops image, as you so much emphasize choosing, etc.

Conference lines were anyways honored in the end, I don't know what is your fucking problem. Is it that hard to admit that US and Soviet Union were allies at that time? Maybe uneasy alliance, but still.

The whole issue is far from easy: Soviet Union did most of the soldiering stuff, but was also significantly materially backed by US. US stepped in against already very much weakened enemy, but in the other hand had been materially involved for long time. As well as air war wise.