Who was main in victory of second world war? Russia or America?
598035
Without either the war may have been lost for the allies...\n\nIt's hard to say....\n\nI suppose that the Russians is my answer, because without them, the British would have lost, and then the Americans might not have gotten involved in the European war.\n\nThe Americans waited until the British started winning to enter the war. The amazing American influence after that shortened the war enormously. \n\nSo the American effort was a vast relief, but the war was probably lost without the Russians.
189521
WWII's victors agreed that both Russia and China should become members of the U.N. Security Council. In terms of overall casualties in the war on the allies side, both Russia and China suffered the most.
319992
Britain and proud of it . But i don`t hate america you guys helped us out in world war two and kept soviets out of western europe i why salute you!!
343885
Hahaha! I like the spirit but perhaps this should be answered by someone unbiased and neutral.. that's me!\n\nWhile the USSR was truly mighty once upon a time, currently the strongest military force on the planet is the USA, whether you like it or not. Russia still has a formidable arsenal but they are certainly not as powerful as the US of A. Also, their economy will not be able to bear the strain of a full fledged modern conflict and so the USA it is again.
62657
mine guess is Russia. in 1939 russia and germany sing a nonargession pact to not attack each other.\nwhen Germany invaded poland in step. 1939 russia did to.  Then in spring of 1941 german attack russia with operation barbarossa and russia becamed allies with england and later the US.
1152286
We effectively did. The Russians stayed within the boundaries that were established at the end of World War II. We could have tried to push the Russians back into their own territory, but Harry Truman didn't want another 200,000 dead Americans.\n\nAnd containment largely worked for the 40 years that the Cold War raged... We won Berlin, drew to a tie in Korea and Cuba, and lost Vietnam (but the Russians didn't win).\nAnd the arms race effectively destroyed the Soviet economy; at a terrible cost to the US, but we won the Cold War.
387780
The US did not win World War II. The Allies did.  The US depended heavily on nations like Briton in it's war efforts during world war II. For example if not for the bombing of a heavy water factory which the British were responsible for finding the Germans may well have had nuclear weapons in time to actually affect the outcome of the war. \n\nThough to the spirit of the question. Germany made a few critical mistakes during the war. A big one was rounding up so many potential soldiers and sending them to concentration camps. Jews, Gypsies, Christians, intellectuals and so on. Germany executed what may have been at least 100,000 of it's best soldiers. People eager to prove how German they were and willing to fight twice as hard to be accepted. People who may have helped build or stratigize. Germany also wasted quite a bit of resrouces transporting and guarding people as well as other military resources dealing with revolts, executing undesirable peoples for example. The genocide also provided the Allies with many excellent spies. What would have otherwise loyal Germans instead supported the Allies. \n\nRussia was a debacle. If the Germans had treated the Russians like people they may well have not found any real resistance at all. Stalin was a blood stained tyrant and even Hitler looked good initially. Hitler could have played up ethnic and nationality issues to gain Russian support. \n\nEven after those huge mistakes, Germany instead of retreating for the Winter basically executed a huge chunk of it's own army attempting to fight the Russians in Winter on Russian soil. \n\nIn Asia a united China might have been a dangerous winner. Even with a common cause like kicking the Japanese out the Chinese still kept at a cival war that had allowed the Japanese into China in the first place. Loyalists to the emporer, those fighting for Democracy and Comuninists were slugging it out and sniping at the Japanese between bouts. \n\nJapan of course made the biggest mistake of all by attacking the US. The American people wanted nothing to do with another European war after so many died in World War I. There was a dedicated and active pacifist cause that sided with the isolationists on this subject. Germany should have volenteered to fight Japan for us rather than let us get into the war on that pretext. \n\nSo in answer it depends on what changed. If the US had not entered the war I think Germany  would have prevailed against Russia eventually. England was another matter. I think Germany would have given up on England for a time and moved into Spain instead. There they would have had their hands full with people like the Basques. Already gurillas in other areas were becoming a serious problem. Once inertia died Germany was doomed to lose many of thier gains without intervention from anybody else. \n\nSo for Germany to realistically have won the war the Military would have had to have pulled a coup on the Nazis. The same political group which spurred the powerful military build up was busy destroying it after about 1942. Executions alone were decimating morale and robbing Germany of some of it's finest. Any time a political group gains power over a military branch like the SS had or what the USSR inflicted on it's armies, it will damage the ability of that army to function. The Nazis had done an effective job of sabataging the German military machine by 42. Enough so that Briton I think could have held out without US military intervention. \n\nJapan was in no way capable of beating US industry. Japan lacked the technology, raw resources and industrial base to compete with the US. Even the pacifists of that day changed stripes because of Pearl Harbour. So for Japan to survive the US had to stay out of the war. With China busy in cival war and Briton busy with Germany Japan could have quietly swallowed up much of Asia if they left US and US ally territory alone. Relations between the US and China was poor at the time. Nobody
532843
2, usa and russia, coz they're ally.
675428
To answer your questions in order:\n\nYes, the Soviet Union (which included Russia) was an ally of the US and the British.  The USSR (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, also called the Soviet Union.  Russia was a part of the USSR, but wasn't called Russia then), led by Stalin, signed a non-aggression pact with Hitler (leader of Germany).  This was in force until Hitler broke it and invaded the Soviet Union.  Stalin was taken unawares and unprepared, so Hitler did well at first.  Stalin therefore allied with the British and the US to fight the Germans.  The "cold war" didn't start until after WWII During the jostling for control over the states freed from the Nazis. \n\n*****\n\nThe USSR and the Japanese didn't work together.  The war in Europe against Germany) ended sooner than that in Japan (May 8, 1945 for Germany’s surrender and August 15, 1945 for Japan’s) and the USSR was free to declare war on Japan, which it did.  This was one of the reasons that the US dropped nuclear bombs on Japan.  It wanted to end the war before the Soviet Union forces entered the fighting, who would then stay and have control in that country and region.  \n\nAfter WWII Germany was divided into two halves, appropriately called West and East Germany.  The US, the United Kingdom (the British) and France controlled the West.  The Soviet Union controlled the East.  Germany was two different countries.  The US, UK and France set up a democracy in the West and then left (although the US left troops to guard against an attack from the Soviet Union, and many are still stationed there.  Now the bases are used as staging grounds for operations in the Afghanistan and Iraq).  The country they created was called the Federal Republic of Germany.\n\nThe Soviet Union established a country in the Eastern half, called the German Democratic Republic. This was not democratic though – it was communist.  The Soviet Union had many troops stationed there as well, and had a lot of influence in the Eastern half.  Vladimir Putin, the current President of the Russian Federation, worked in East Germany as a spy when he was part of the KGB (this isn’t a secret – he admits it freely and uses his excellent German in speeches).\n\n*****\nGermany played a very strong role in the War.  They were allied with Japan, but because they had some common enemies in their efforts to expand their territories.  In Europe, the war started when Germany annexed Austria and Czechoslovakia, claiming to be uniting the Germans who lived there (Austrians speak German and there were a lot of Germans in Czechoslovakia.  The moved there in the centuries that it belonged to the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the Austrian Empire and the Holy Roman Empire, which were all names used at different times to describe the same Empire ruled from the Austrian city of Vienna). At this point there was a lot of nervousness in Europe, as Hitler was using rhetoric such as “Germans need more land to live, which is their birthright.” But the British made a deal with Hitler that they would let him keep those countries if he didn’t go any further.  Hitler agreed, but he invaded Poland anyway, and kept going from there. He took France, Bombed England and wanted to invade, and moved through Eastern Europe.  He also invaded the USSR, as mentioned above.\n\nThe US at this point wasn’t involved.  Hitler made an alliance with the Japanese, who were engaged in their own war of expansion, because both were fighting the British and French (the British had a lot of Colonial holdings in the Pacific, and the French had some, too).  \n\nThe US became involved when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor.  The Japanese wanted the US to withdraw from the pacific, but instead the US declared war on the Japanese.  The Japanese and the Germans were allied, so Germany declared war on the US, which then also entered the European war.  It was already helping the UK and the USSR with equipment and logistical support,
532836
We think we won the war not because we won it alone (although I would say the USSR has a much bigger claim on being a deciding factor than the UK) because you were losing alone, and we stepped in and helped turn the tide.  You were holding your own and preventing an invasion on the UK, but losing ground in the Pacific and couldn’t hold out forever in the UK proper, either.  The US stepped in, and was the help you needed to win on the Western European front.  The USSR has a stronger claim as well because it fought a vicious war with levels of self-sacrifice that the UK never even close to matched (although this isn’t to attack the UK – it is a good thing for the people there that they weren’t invaded and didn’t have any Stalingrads or Leningrad sieges), which is why they get more credit as well.  The US also feels like it deserves a thank you because it wasn’t invaded by the Nazis and of its geographic location meant that it probably could have held out indefinitely – unlike the UK, it had a choice about entering the war, but did so anyway, at a great cost in lives and money.  In the Pacific, the US provided more troops and infrastructure than did the UK (again, not because the UK was lazy or somehow worse at fighting, but because they had less men, less money and less production capacity as well as more pressing threats to the UK itself, and were stretched as far as it could be), and afterwards returned much of the area it freed to the UK.  We also were responsbile for the reconstruction and reformation of Japan.  The British helped there, true, but they had to work on reconstructing their own lands (much of which was funded by the US’s Marshall Plan), so the again the bulk of the effort was the US’s.  So we see it as we earned a decent share of the credit there too.\n\nIf anything, i woudl argue that the USSR deserves mroe credit - for positical reasons their contributions were downplayed by the West during the Cold War. I wouldn't give Canada too much credit fo rhelping form day one - their contributions were worthy, but they had no choice in helping; the Kig of England was their head of state. If England was bombed, they had to get involved.  The US only had to get invovled if to help the other states (it could have left Hawaii and the other Pacific holdings as the Japanese thought it would and continued peacefully as the continental US plus Alaska for a long time).\n\nPS Why are you so angry about htis?  Did you fight in WWII and feel you aren't getting your fair share of the redit?  are you generally bitter that yours is not the wealthiest adn msot powerful country?  If you are Canadian - be grateful for this.  You spend minimal amounts on your military because you know that the US woul dnever allow Canada to be invaded.  You then spend your money on social programs such as national health and inexpensive univeristy education.
757131
its russia, it;s surpassed the u.s in weapons sales. the russian weapons are the best in the world.
329251
B - because of the advances in mainland China, it forced the US to fight a two front war.  The Japanese caused the americans, and Russians to have to balance their military efforts.  If the US and Russia could have spent less time in Asia, then they could have taken care of the German and Italians faster.
266834
German Hitler=megalomaniac, tried to create a dynasty by conquering Europe.  Japanese=pissed at the US over trade practices, attacks the US @ Pearl Harbor.  The US fights (with Allies) in Europe, Africa, and the Pacific.  Wins.
65573
The US has the most, with Russia not to far behind.
667322
Boy, there's a debate.\n\nShort Answer: The United States, and it did it by spend the Soviet Union into oblivion. The USSR suffered the fate of most empires -- it overextended itself and ran of the resources necessary to sustain its empire.\nBut the US did it at a terrible cost. We are now stuck with a military-industrial complex that is bleeding us drive and could very soon threaten our own superiority.\n\nSo philosophical answer: The Cold War isn't over yet, and we could still lose.
670765
Absolutely. The US was able to apply resources that the British and the Russians struggled to supply. The Russians fought an incredibly bitter war and in many cases the Nazis were known to prefer fighting against the US and the UK than the Russians. However, it was the sheer scale of the entrance of the US to WW2 that put Hitler firmly on the backfoot. To sum up - The British won the war because they stood fast against a superior army, the Russians won the war through sheer sacrifice of numbers and grim determination, and the US won the war because although they were more interested in sorting out the Japanese (Pearl Harbour), they pumped billions of dollars worth of aircraft, man power and ammunition into the effort.
789665
no, cos the two wars they fought with the oppostion haveing air and sea power proved america can not fight a country with those capabilities, the second world war the soviets won as even the german admitted after, the pacific war ,america resorted to use two atom bombs to make the japs surrender, there is a saying, "never fight an enemy who could hit you back twice as hard"